Michigan’s State Technology Plan
(1998)
UPDATE 2004
DRAFT
Michigan Department of Education
Lansing, Michigan
D:\106760832.doc
Michigan’s State Technology Plan (1998)—Update 2004
Michigan’s State Technology Plan (1998) — Update 2000 was adopted by the State
Superintendent’s Educational Technology Advisory Committee (ETAG) on November 6, 2000
and, upon recommendation by State Superintendent Arthur Ellis, accepted by the State of
Michigan Board of Education on December 14, 2000. Update 2004 was adopted upon
recommendation by State Superintendent Thomas Watkins, accepted by the State of Michigan
Board of Education on <insert date>.
The format for this document includes the original material from the 1998 plan, with updates
included at the end of each section in dark blue.
Table of Contents
Executive Summary ____________________________________________________________ 4
Position of the State Board of Education ____________________________________________ 6
Introduction ___________________________________________________________________ 7
History of State Technology Planning ______________________________________________ 9
Alignment with Other Initiatives __________________________________________________ 11
Assessment of Michigan’s Performance ____________________________________________ 12
Belief Statements _____________________________________________________________ 17
Recommendations _____________________________________________________________ 19
Recommendation 1: Equity ______________________________________________________ 21
Recommendation 2: Technology Integration ________________________________________ 24
Recommendation 3: Competency Expectations of K-12 Graduates _______________________ 28
Recommendation 4: Training ____________________________________________________ 29
Recommendation 5: Technology Budgets and Training ________________________________ 32
Recommendation 6: Teacher Competencies _________________________________________ 35
Recommendation 7: Information Clearinghouse ______________________________________ 38
Recommendation 8: Technology Staffing Levels _____________________________________ 41
Recommendation 9: Supplementary Technical Support ________________________________ 44
Recommendation 10: Infrastructure Support_________________________________________ 46
Recommendation 11: Technical Standards __________________________________________ 49
Recommendation 12: Model Technology Plan _______________________________________ 51
Recommendation 13: Technology Appropriation _____________________________________ 53
Recommendation 14: Funding Flexibility ___________________________________________ 55
Recommendation 15: Collaboration _______________________________________________ 57
Recommendation 16: Statewide Purchasing and Licensing _____________________________ 59
Recommendation 17: Advocacy __________________________________________________ 62
Recommendation 18: Public Awareness ____________________________________________ 65
Recommendation 19: Administrative Communications ________________________________ 67
Recommendation 20: Electronic Learning Community ________________________________ 69
Recommendation 21: State Technology Plan ________________________________________ 71
Appendices __________________________________________________________________ 73
Cover photograph: Michigan Department of Education’s Educator on Loan for 1998-99, Marilyn Western, assists in a
professional development seminar funded by the Technology Literacy Challenge Fund. Photography courtesy of Deb
Dunbar, Gratiot-Isabella Intermediate School District.
2
All Update 2004 sections are DRAFT 060404 Version
Michigan’s State Technology Plan (1998)—Update 2004
Executive Summary
In providing its approval to Michigan’s State Technology Plan (1998), the State Board of
Education reaffirms its support for the role that technology can play in furthering the educational
mission and contributing to student achievement. The growth in the use of voice, video and data
technologies by schools in Michigan parallels the evolution of state technology plans adopted by
the Board and the implementation of recommendations included in those plans by the Michigan
Department of Education (MDE). Michigan is fortunate to have so many groups and organizations
that firmly believe in the potential for technology to benefit education and the state’s diverse
student population. The challenges and opportunities that lie ahead, to convert “potential” into
reality, will require an unprecedented degree of creative leadership from educators and
policymakers at all levels.
Michigan’s State Technology Plan (1998) (hereafter referred to as Tech Plan ‘98) includes 21
Recommendations and more than a dozen Belief Statements. These include incorporating
technology into the curriculum, training teachers and other staff members, funding educational
technology programs, and establishing technical standards and a telecommunications
infrastructure on which educators can rely. A fundamental recommendation is the creation of
statewide policies that address equity of access to technology-delivered learning resources for all
students, regardless of their economic status, place of residence, age, disability, and other factors.
Another key proposal calls on MDE and other educational interests to intensify their advocacy of
technology in the learning environment.
The preceding state policy document, Michigan’s State Technology Plan (1992-1997), was
scheduled to be revisited and updated in 1997. The pace of technological innovation in education
is rapid, as evidenced by the Internet’s increasing power. The state’s guiding policy document for
the application of technology in education must reflect the many electronic learning tools used by
schools today, such as high-speed multimedia computers and interactive video classrooms.
Further, it is imperative that Michigan has a state technology plan that is in compliance with
requirements of funding initiatives of the federal government.
The State Board of Education acknowledges the instrumental role played by the State
Superintendent’s Educational Technology Advisory Group (ETAG) in assisting MDE in the
preparation of Tech Plan 98. Approximately 40 groups and organizations participated in the
process and provided support and staff assistance. Membership was composed of public and
private sector stakeholders in the application of technology in the educational mission, including
public and nonpublic schools, public school academies, colleges and universities, libraries,
businesses, plus teachers, school administrators and business officials, media and curriculum
specialists, parents and students. It is the Board’s intent that ETAG continue to provide advice and
expertise in implementation and periodic updates of the plan.
The Board also recognizes the role that technology itself played in the creation of Tech Plan '98. It
would not have been possible for ETAG and MDE to maintain their ambitious timetable without
reliance on a variety of online and video technologies to assist with topical research, public
opinion sampling, information dissemination and, ultimately, development of the final document.
Update 2000
In keeping with Recommendation #21 that the state technology plan be regularly reviewed and
updated, this document contains status reports and additional recommendations. For each
recommendation, an Update 2000 section adds new materials that reflect current conditions and
newly identified needs. Previous Tech Plan ’98 material has not been modified outside of these
clearly marked update sections. The updates were reviewed by ETAG at a July 2000 meeting and
submitted to the State Superintendent for approval in November, 2000.
3
All Update 2004 sections are DRAFT 060404 Version
Michigan’s State Technology Plan (1998)—Update 2004
Update 2004
In keeping with Recommendation #21 that the state technology plan be regularly reviewed and
updated, this document contains status reports and additional recommendations. For each
recommendation, an Update 2004 section adds new materials that reflect current conditions and
newly identified needs. Neither the previous Tech Plan ’98 , nor Update 2000 materials have been
modified outside of these clearly marked update sections. The updates were reviewed by ………..
and submitted to the State Superintendent for approval in …. , 2004.
4
All Update 2004 sections are DRAFT 060404 Version
Michigan’s State Technology Plan (1998)—Update 2004
I. Position of the State Board of Education
Educators in Michigan have a long-standing tradition of supporting the application of technology
in the education process. The State Board of Education remains committed to policies and
initiatives which further this effort.
A state technology plan must be multidimensional to serve the numerous sectors of the learning
community, but it will ultimately be judged according to its impact on students and student
achievement. The State Board of Education, in adopting Tech Plan '98, identifies the following as
the collective purpose of this document:

To offer a vision regarding the use of technology in education and the manner in which it
contributes to providing equitable access to learning opportunities for all students;

To provide a guide for the utilization of technology in the learning environment to meet each
student’s needs and abilities and improve achievement and performance of all students;

To advance existing technology activities and encourage the establishment of complementary
state, federal and local initiatives and policies which supportive of technology in education;

To advocate that all educational institutions in Michigan become actively engaged in the
dialogue about, planning for and use of technology to advance their educational missions and
better prepare students for life in the 21st century.
Tech Plan '98 is the most recent in a series of policy documents focusing on technology in
education that has been adopted by the State Board of Education. The Board’s first state
technology plan was approved in 1987. It was followed in 1990 by Education: Where the Next
Century Begins, a document that proposed the creation of a five-year state technology plan. That
recommendation was realized two years later when Michigan’s State Technology Plan (19921997) received Board approval.
It is the Board’s intent that unlike its predecessor, Tech Plan '98 should not have an expiration
date. It will be reviewed on a recurring basis and amended as needed to retain the relevance and
vitality necessary to serve as “a living document.”
5
All Update 2004 sections are DRAFT 060404 Version
Michigan’s State Technology Plan (1998)—Update 2004
II. Introduction
Education is about the future. The word itself is derived from the Latin “educere,” meaning to lead
out from. This implies a constant state of change and renewal. Nowhere is this more visible than in
the area of technology, where generations come and go practically overnight, and capabilities only
dreamed of five years ago are now commonplace. Children enter a world today in which many of
the careers they will pursue do not yet exist.
During the past decade, institutions in every segment of society have made sweeping changes
related to their design, function, and operation. Technology was at the forefront of many of these
changes. There was often an initial decrease in productivity, with benefits accruing only after
technology was completely incorporated. It has usually taken 10-15 years between the time
educational research gene-Rates an innovation and new teaching practices based on the innovation
are implemented. Since the life cycle of many technologies is often less than 5 years, educators are
challenged to decrease that lag time considerably. Various surveys show that many schools in
Michigan are playing a game of “catch up” in adopting technology. The lack of up-to-date
hardware and software, as well as training, technical support and local networking infrastructure,
is slowing the widespread implementation of technology in schools. Some schools are unable to
make large investments due to ongoing financial constraints.
Nevertheless, schools now have more access to technology than ever before. A growing number of
students, teachers, administrators and parents are using powerful tools to conduct research, prepare
electronic portfolios, collaborate on projects, simulate complex mathematical equations, engage in
discussions with experts, publish work online, develop new communication skills and assume
greater responsibility for their own learning and professional development. The use of technology
is helping to transform education, replacing a traditional reliance on conventional practices with
strategies that help tailor the educational environment to address the needs of each student. Figure
1 contrasts traditional approaches with technology enhanced teaching and learning environments.
The real promise of technology in education lies in its potential to facilitate changes in the nature
of teaching and learning. Using technology to restructure schools should not mean automating
conventional practices, but instead changing significant aspects of the entire process. Technology
opens the door for self-paced, individualized instruction and student-centered learning. It creates
opportunities to access worldwide information resources and develop knowledge within new
contexts. Technology contributes to the improvement of two-way, school-home communications
to better engage parents. It offers the potential to empower historically disadvantaged groups such
as students with disabilities, by providing them with greater access to communications and
learning tools.
Technology has been called “a road to the world,” and now more than ever it offers the
opportunity for learning to occur anywhere, at anytime, for anyone. It is forcing educators to
rethink what is meant by terms such as “classroom,” “school” and “student.” It is giving learners
of all ages an opportunity to create a future of their own.
6
All Update 2004 sections are DRAFT 060404 Version
Michigan’s State Technology Plan (1998)—Update 2004
Figure 1: The Transformation of Education
Traditional Approach consists of:
Technology allows more of:

Teacher-centered learning

Student-centered learning

Mass instruction (one size fits all)

Mass customization with instruction to fit
individual student needs

One pace applies to all students

Flexible pacing based on student abilities

Classroom and school building

Distributed learning possible from
anyplace

Learning during school hours

Learning at anytime

Facts and recitation

Critical thinking in real-world contexts

Individual student performance

Collaboration and dialogue among students
and between students and teachers

Textbooks

Up-to-date primary information resources

Parent-teacher meeting each semester

Parent-teacher communication available
daily
7
All Update 2004 sections are DRAFT 060404 Version
Michigan’s State Technology Plan (1998)—Update 2004
III. History of State Technology Planning
Tech Plan '98 draws a portion of its strength from the comparatively recent past. Of a number of
technology policy documents, including the Michigan State Board of Education Technology Plan
(1987) and even earlier calls for a statewide computer network linking educational institutions,
two documents approved by the State Board of Education warrant special mention:

Education: Where the Next Century Begins (1990);

Michigan’s State Technology Plan (1992-1997).
Education: Where the Next Century Begins featured 14 Goals, including one that called for the
creation of a five-year state technology plan. It also encouraged coordination in four major areas:
1) investments in educational technology; 2) support for the integration of technology-based
programs in the curriculum; 3) technical assistance to educational agencies to maximize the
successful use of technology; and 4) professional development to upgrade the technological skills
of educators. Two years later, Michigan’s State Technology Plan (1992-1997) was adopted by the
State Board of Education. It included 22 Recommendations categorized into five major themes:
1) restructuring schools using technology; 2) developing statewide telecommunications systems
for teaching, learning and communication; 3) professional development for the learning
community; 4) technology investments for the future; and 5) copyright and fair use implications.
These two documents and the State Board of Education were visionary, as seen by the facts that all
the categories and themes remain relevant today, including the conclusion in 1992 that public
education was the last major labor-intensive industry to incorporate technology into its day-to-day
activities. In particular, Michigan’s State Technology Plan (1992-1997) provided leadership and
guidance to the educational community throughout the state, including the Michigan Department
of Education. The Plan’s role in heightening awareness of the potential for technology to benefit
education and student learning has been noteworthy.
Update 2000
Taking Technology Planning into the New Millennium. When Tech Plan ’98 was passed, it
included a final recommendation to create a living document that would continue to reflect the
changing face of technology and the ongoing progress being made to achieve the
recommendations. As a result of this recommendation, this update has been developed.
The review process of Tech Plan ’98 began in January, 1999. The initial process involved an
ETAG sub-committee preparing updated information for each recommendation. Data from the
Quality Education Data, Inc. (QED) survey released in August, 1999 and the 1999 School
Improvement Superintendent’s Survey results released in December, 1999 were used to provide
statistical support to anecdotal information for recommendations as appropriate. Based on the subcommittee recommendations, MDE staff with assistance from an external consultant developed
the Update 2000 sections for each of the 21 recommendations. The revised document was
submitted to ETAG for comments and approval at their meeting in July 2000, and the revised
document was forwarded to the State Superintendent for approval in November, 2000.
With a new National Technology Plan due for release in late 2000, the continuing need for review
and updating is increasingly important. Plans for the revision need to be reviewed by the State
Superintendent and Michigan Department of Education to ensure the process is participative and
comprehensive.
8
All Update 2004 sections are DRAFT 060404 Version
Michigan’s State Technology Plan (1998)—Update 2004
Update 2004
The review process of Tech Plan ‘98 for Update 2004 began in November 2003. The initial
process involved MDE staff preparing updated information for each recommendation. In early
2003, MDE formed the No Child Left Behind (NCLB) Education Technology Committee, which
in August of 2003 submitted a report of recommended changes to the existing plan. In addition to
the recommendations from the NCLB committee, each of the various offices within MDE were
invited to provide input into the development of the Update 2004 sections for each of the 21
recommendations. The plan was carefully reviewed to ensure that it adequately addresses the
technology requirements of the No Child Left Behind Act. Several members of the NCLB
Technology Advisory Committee participated in the final revision, which was forwarded to the
State Superintendent for approval in xxxx 2004.
9
All Update 2004 sections are DRAFT 060404 Version
Michigan’s State Technology Plan (1998)—Update 2004
IV. Alignment with Other Initiatives
Technology planning on the federal, state, regional and local levels cannot be conducted by only a
small handful of people within a single institution and still be of value. Technology represents a
thread to be woven through many other planning and policy initiatives. It can strengthen because
of its presence or weaken by its absence. Equally important, educational technology policies at all
levels perform best when they are mutually advantageous and supportive.
Significant to Tech Plan '98 is the Instructional Technology Across the Curriculum (ITAC)
initiative and the Ad Hoc Referent Committee for Preservice Technology. The latter seeks to
supplement existing state standards for entry-level teachers. Further, immediate credibility can be
gained if the Plan is consistent with requirements of Michigan’s Revised School Code of 1995, in
particular the provision that schools have annually-updated school improvement plans, which
include a technology component.
The ability to implement some of the recommendations in Tech Plan '98 is dependent on the
successful execution of other state initiatives. One example is the proposed creation of a virtual
Michigan Information Network. This would be a close collaboration of a number of state agencies
with many non-governmental organizations and providers of telecommunications services. The
Plan must complement, and MDE must provide some staff resources to help realize, such a
communications network.
Figure 2: The Four Pillars
The National Plan for Technology in Education, created by the President and the U.S. Department
of Education, addresses four primary goals, known as “the four pillars,” on which the federal
government’s educational technology program is based. Most of the 21 Recommendations in Tech
Plan '98 address issues that correspond with at least one of the four pillars. The recommendations
are referenced in brackets beneath each pillar description.

Training: All teachers in the nation will have the training and support they need to
help students learn through computers and the Information Superhighway.
[Michigan Recommendations 2, 4, 5, 6, 8, 9, 12]

Hardware: All teachers and students will have modern computers in their
classrooms.
[Michigan Recommendations 12, 13, 14, 19]

Access and Connectivity: Every classroom will be connected to the Information
Superhighway.
[Michigan Recommendations 1, 7, 10, 11, 12, 13, 14, 15, 20]

Content Resources: Effective and engaging software and online learning resources
will be an integral part of every school curriculum.
[Michigan Recommendations 1, 2, 4, 6, 7, 12, 14, 16, 20]
The four pillars were important to Michigan’s implementation of the Federal Technology Literacy
Challenge Fund program in 1997. The Program provided more than $8 million that was distributed
to Michigan schools on a competitive grant basis. Expectations of an increased state allocation
exist for the next four years. To participate, though, Michigan must have a state technology plan
that is approved by the U.S. Department of Education. Similarly, school districts must have stateapproved technology plans if they are to benefit from the federal Universal Service Fund (USF)
program and its promise of providing schools with discounts of 20 to 90 percent on a variety of
telecommunications services, including Internet access and internal wiring.
10
All Update 2004 sections are DRAFT 060404 Version
Michigan’s State Technology Plan (1998)—Update 2004
VI. Assessment of Michigan’s Performance
To establish realistic goals, to prepare strategies to achieve them and to devise methods by which
accomplishments will be measured demand the existence of base line data for purposes of
comparison. While Michigan has witnessed a tremendous growth in the number of educational
video networks since 1992—more than a 550 percent increase based on data collected in 1996 for
the Michigan Department of Education’s Inventory of Instructional Telecommunications Systems
in Michigan—the state’s overall educational technology portrait is far less impressive. According
to three organizations, Michigan’s performance relative to national figures is rarely above average,
only occasionally average, and frequently below average.
For example, Michigan ranks below the national average for schools having local area networks
(LANs), based on information available from Education Week (November 1997), Market Data
Retrieval (1997) and Quality Education Data (1997), and in schools having wide area networks
(WANs), according to Education Week and Market Data Retrieval. All three report that Michigan
is below the national average for schools having Internet access and in satellite technology.
Student ratios per specific information appliance or technology tool are generally below average,
and Education Week indicates that just 10 percent of Michigan’s teachers have had at least nine
hours of technology training in their career, versus 15 percent nationally. Only in the percentage of
schools having cable television access does Michigan exceed the national average, according to all
three sources. While greater access to information technology does not guarantee increased
student achievement, students in Michigan appear to have less access than those in other states.
Though none of the aforementioned publications and survey organizations prepared state-by-state
comparisons of educational technology funding, Education Week portrayed Michigan as relying
almost entirely on federal support coupled with local district and community resources, while
other states have benefited from more active involvement by their legislatures. However, the
illustrations do show that those states exhibiting more centralized systems of planning and funding
educational technology, accompanied by strong statewide leadership, generally enjoy the greatest
amount of progress and forward movement.
A need for Michigan to have a strategy for adequately funding statewide educational technology
programs, plus those of local schools, was identified by the U.S. Department of Education in its
response to MDE’s application to administer the state’s portion of the federal Technology Literacy
Challenge Fund program in 1997. Among other things, the federal agency said that Michigan’s
proposal should include not only direct funding, but also complementary approaches such as
incentives, along with contributions from businesses, universities, and individuals. Michigan’s
strategy for funding educational technology in recent years has not been compiled into a single
policy approach, but continues to include a variety of components:

Local school districts in Michigan continue to make substantial commitments of their own. In
1996 and 1997, voters in more than 120 districts approved “qualified” bond issues under the
state’s School Bond Loan Fund, representing building-level, technology infrastructure
investments that exceed $190 million.

The federal Technology Literacy Challenge Fund distributed more than $8 million to schools
in Michigan under a competitive grant program in 1997. A significant increase in the state’s
annual allocation is anticipated through the year 2000.

Informal estimates range up to $100 million annually for the potential impact in Michigan of
the federal Universal Service Fund (USF) program. USF discounts will be available to
schools and libraries for a variety of telecommunications services, plus internal wiring and
Internet access.

The settlement in 1997 of the Durant case between 84 local and intermediate public school
districts and the State of Michigan includes a payment of $212 million to those districts, plus
11
All Update 2004 sections are DRAFT 060404 Version
Michigan’s State Technology Plan (1998)—Update 2004
a total investment of more than $600 million over ten years to non-plaintiff districts.
Allowable uses of that latter figure include electronic instructional material and software,
technology, infrastructure and infrastructure improvements, and training for technology.

More than $10 million of excess earnings of Ameritech were distributed to two statewide and
six regional educational technology programs beginning in 1995, under a program
administered by the Michigan Public Service Commission. Ameritech matched that figure
with a contribution of its own.

The Michigan Telecommunications Act introduced a significant degree of competition into
the state’s telecommunications market in 1992, that firmly expresses the belief that
competition will reduce prices for all customers, including schools.
Policymakers and educators in Michigan must assemble and organize the preceding initiatives,
along with other efforts, into a comprehensive strategy that will help schools in financially
supporting educational technology programs. A first step is to continue gathering information that
will evaluate the current status. In 1996, MDE updated its Inventory of Instructional
Telecommunications Systems in Michigan to help chart the growth of educational networks in the
state. In 1997, Michigan participated with Quality Education Data of Denver in the collection of
data for a national educational technology survey. The resulting state profile, ProjectEdTech, was
released in May 1997. MDE will continue its involvement with data-gathering initiatives, and
whenever possible introduce surveys that will help establish base line data to assist in measuring
the success of recommendations included in Tech Plan '98.
Figure 3: Definitions for Technology and Related Terms
References to technology, technology literacy and similar words and phrases can be confusing.
There are formal definitions, as well as informal descriptions and usage. There is no shortage of
either.
There are two general applications or uses of technology that are particularly relevant to
Tech Plan '98:

Developing the skills necessary to operate various technologies, such as a computer word
processing software program, an Internet web browser, a video camera, a graphing
calculator, a personal digital assistant or an alternate input device.

Applying the aforementioned skills in a search for knowledge and information or for the
completion of specific educational, workplace or personal tasks, such as multiple-site,
collaborative student learning, geographic information systems (GIS) data mapping, or
computer-assisted drafting/computer-assisted machining (CAD/CAM).
Technology” has been informally described as any tool invented after a person is born. This
concept reinforces the generational aspects of technological innovations such as the automobile,
television, microwave oven, or laptop computer. Many children today consider a computer to be
little more than another electronic appliance. The term “technology” as used in this Plan
encompasses assistive technology, technology education, instructional technology, and industrial
technology.
Tech Plan '98 is strengthened to the degree that it can use existing definitions and descriptions,
especially those included in current state and federal policy documents. One document in
particular, Instructional Technology Across The Curriculum (ITAC), was created by the Michigan
Department of Education (MDE) and a coalition of educational organizations, and relies heavily
on another MDE publication, Technology Content Standards and Benchmarks (1996). Key
portions of the following definitions are drawn from these sources.
12
All Update 2004 sections are DRAFT 060404 Version
Michigan’s State Technology Plan (1998)—Update 2004

“Technology” is the systematic application of knowledge, materials, tools and skills to extend
human capabilities. A “technology curriculum” integrates the complementary areas of
technology education and instructional technology.

“Technology education” is defined as the study of technology and its effects on individuals,
society and civilization. It is a subject or content area, but can include the development of
specific technology benchmarks or proficiencies. It helps place student learning into practical
and useful real-world contexts.

“Instructional technology,” sometimes identified as “educational technology,” is the
application of technology to the teaching and learning process. Sample activities include
enabling students to complete assignments, access information, and integrate knowledge and
skills. The phrase also encompasses the application of technology to administrative functions
of an educational institution. It has sometimes been used solely in reference to computers and
the Internet, but that is an inappropriately narrow application.

A “technologically literate learner” is one who explores, evaluates and uses technology to
accomplish, independently and cooperatively, real world tasks; develops knowledge, ability
and responsibility in the use of resources, processes and systems of technology; acquires,
organizes, analyzes and presents information; expands the range and effectiveness of
communication skills; solves problems, accomplishes tasks and expresses individual
creativity; and applies legal and ethical standards.

“Industrial technology” is a commonly used phrase that refers to a practical application of
technology in the use of materials, tools, and processes in industrial settings. According to
MDE’s teacher preparation standards, the teaching of industrial technology can include many
of the same concepts—critical thinking, problem solving, human dynamics, creativity, and
invention—that are stressed when technology-assisted learning occurs in standard classrooms.
References to “infrastructure” in Tech Plan '98 are defined according to common understanding.
“Technology infrastructure” refers to, among other things, cabling and wiring, computers and
software programs, satellite transmission and reception facilities, and switching equipment
necessary for the operation of telecommunications networks and instructional programs. “Human
infrastructure” generally means teachers, media specialists, administrators, students, and others
needed to implement and sustain an educational technology program.
A definition of a “technology program” is, to a great extent, situational, to be determined by
individual educational institutions. Technology programs frequently incorporate technology
planning, administration, training, support and funding, plus the actual application of technology
in the learning environment.
Figure 4: Educational Outcomes Derived From Technology
More and more research on educational outcomes is reporting that technology benefits student
learning. Empirical data reinforces beliefs held by many teachers and other educators that
technology, when properly employed, enhances educational horizons and student performance.
At least three publications have attempted to summarize existing research on the impact of
technology on education:

Computers and Classrooms: The Status of Technology in U.S. Schools (1997), Educational
Testing Service.

Report on the Effectiveness of Technology in Schools (1995-1996), Software Publishers
Association.

The ACOT Research Portfolio (1994), Student Engagement (Report #21), Apple Classrooms
of Tomorrow.
13
All Update 2004 sections are DRAFT 060404 Version
Michigan’s State Technology Plan (1998)—Update 2004
Studies highlighted in each report show that student attitudes toward learning can be bolstered
when technology is used in the learning environment. This attitude helps improve student
performance and teacher satisfaction. However, carefully designed assessments that present
conclusive findings are far outnumbered by claims that technology benefits education.
Most of the immediately identifiable research is national in scope. It does not focus on the impact
of technology on students and teachers in Michigan. Educators at local, regional and state levels
should be watchful for opportunities to incorporate outcome measurements in their technology
programs. Such research would nicely complement anecdotal evidence that is comparatively
commonplace.
_____________________________________________________________________________
Update 2004 – Figure 3: Definitions for Technology and Related Terms
While many of the definitions in Figure 3 are still operable, several are not adequately aligned
with what are currently endorsed by national experts. To avoid confusion with what are now
commonly accepted national technology definitions, the State of Michigan agrees that
“technology” is much more than information, infrastructure, and computers.


An excerpt from Standards for Technological Literacy (International Technology
Education Association (ITEA), 2000) states, “Broadly speaking, technology is how
people modify the natural world to suit their own purposes. From the Greek word techne,
meaning art or artifice or craft, technology literally means the act of making or crafting,
but more generally it refers to the diverse collection of processes and knowledge that
people use to extend human abilities and to satisfy human needs and wants.”
Technology —
o Human innovation in action that involves the generation of knowledge and processes
to develop systems that solve problems and extend human capabilities.
o The innovation, change, or modification of the natural environment to satisfy
perceived human needs and wants.
14

“Technological Literacy” is the ability to use, manage, understand, and assess
technology.

“Technology Education” is the study of technology, which provides an opportunity for
students to learn about the processes and knowledge related to technology that are needed
to solve problems and extend human capabilities.

“Educational (Instructional) Technology” is the use of technological developments, such
as computers, audio-visual equipment, and mass media, as tools to enhance and optimize
the teaching and learning environment in all school subjects, including technology
education. (Advancing Excellence in Technological Literacy, 2003)

In the mid-1990s, Dr. William A. Wulf, president of the National Academy of
Engineering (NAE), initiated discussions at the NAE, the National Research Council
(NRC), the National Science Foundation (NSF), and other groups on the issue of
technological literacy. The discussions revealed that the concept of technological literacy
is poorly understood and significantly undervalued. The discussions led to the
development of an Academy committee on technological literacy that was charged with
developing a common understanding of what technological literacy is, how important it is
to the nation, and how it can be achieved. The committee adopted a broad definition of
technology stating that “technology…encompasses both the tangible artifacts of the
All Update 2004 sections are DRAFT 060404 Version
Michigan’s State Technology Plan (1998)—Update 2004
human-designed world (e.g., bridges, automobiles, computers, satellites, medical imaging
devices, drugs, genetically engineered plants) and the systems of which these artifacts are
a part (e.g., transportation, communications, health care, food production), as well as, the
people, infrastructure, and processes required to design, manufacture, operate, and repair
artifacts.” (NAE, 2002)

Committee consensus on the definition of “Educational Technology” needed and
inserted here….
Standards for Technological Literacy: Content for the Study of Technology (STL) was developed
by the International Technology Education Association's Technology for All Americans Project
(ITEA-TfAAP).
15
All Update 2004 sections are DRAFT 060404 Version
Michigan’s State Technology Plan (1998)—Update 2004
Belief Statements
In adopting the following belief statements related to the use of technology in education, the State
Board of Education recognizes the work of the State Superintendent’s Educational Technology
Advisory Group (ETAG) and the many challenges that it faced. As members of ETAG proposed
and discussed possible recommendations related to the application of technology in the learning
environment, it became apparent that a significant number of those proposals serve a more
fundamental purpose than does an actual recommendation. These concepts came to be called
“Belief Statements,” upon which many of the recommendations are based.

Each school district should establish policies that encourage and support the carefully planned
use of technology to increase learning opportunities for students, faculty, administrators,
support personnel and community members, and to integrate technology into the curriculum
to enrich and expand the learning environment.

Instructional and administrative applications of technology must drive decisions related to the
acquisition of new technology and subsequent activities that provide staff training and
professional development in the use of technology.

Technology plans are not stand-alone documents; technology planning, both for curriculum
integration and physical plant upgrades, must be undertaken in coordination with school
improvement plans and school reform initiatives.

Electronic access must be provided to educational resources during times of the day, week
and year when school is not in session, since student learning is not an exercise restricted to
the traditional school day and the standard classroom.

Schools must strive to remove all identifiable gender, racial, cultural, disability or similarly
based barriers in providing student, teacher and staff access to, and support for, participation
in technology-based learning environments.

All school districts should establish a process and written guidelines to provide consistency in
the delivery of assistive technology services and devices to individuals with disabilities, in
accordance with the Individuals with Disabilities Education Act of 1997 (IDEA).

Students should have opportunities to use a wide variety of technologies, including
multimedia computers and graphing calculators, plus peripherals such as videocassette
players, scanners and digital cameras, in grade- or age-appropriate ways to research and
complete learning assignments, and to create, present, display and publish their learning and
academic performance.

School districts have an obligation to develop and disseminate policies to help ensure that
students, parents, teachers and staff are aware of the potential hazards related to the use of
information technology tools; possible hazards encompass not only health and safety issues
such as eyestrain and carpel tunnel syndrome, but also those related to student access to
inappropriate content resources.

There is a general, but not rigid progression of successively more sophisticated innovations
that help characterize schools and school districts as technologically capable, to benefit
students by improving both the learning environment and school-home communications. Each
of the following innovations has implications for the training of teachers, staff, students, and
parents.
a) Voice mail for each school and teacher;
b) Local Internet access for schools and communities;
c) Direct dedicated Internet access in each school;
d) Email with school and have access for each school employee;
16
All Update 2004 sections are DRAFT 060404 Version
Michigan’s State Technology Plan (1998)—Update 2004
e) Classrooms, administrative offices, counseling center and library media center
connected to local and/or wide area networks (LANs/WANs) to access shared
educational resources and increased operational efficiencies;
f) A web page for publication of each school’s curriculum and other information;
g) Each school having a web page for the dissemination of building-specific information;
h) Multi-band satellite reception; and
i) Interactive video.

An integrated telecommunications network that is widely and easily accessible by educational
institutions throughout the state requires the adoption of technical standards.

Educators should seek to establish community partnerships and collaborative endeavors to
successfully implement technology solutions, especially in sharing with neighboring
educational institutions, libraries, nonprofit organizations, private businesses and government
agencies.

Intermediate school districts and/or regional educational media centers are appropriate
agencies to assist the Michigan Department of Education in servicing and supporting local
districts in planning and implementing technology programs.

The Michigan Department of Education must strengthen its efforts in the use of state-of-theart technologies to deliver services to Michigan’s educational community.

States possessing creative leadership, especially champions for the instructional and
administrative applications of technology, have the best chance to achieve significant progress
in the funding and use of new technologies to enhance student learning.
17
All Update 2004 sections are DRAFT 060404 Version
Michigan’s State Technology Plan (1998)—Update 2004
Recommendations - REVISE PAGE NUMBERS!!!!
The State Board of Education adopts the following 21 Recommendations with the understanding
that they are essential and significant steps necessary to advance the application of technology in
the learning environment and provide substantial benefit to students throughout Michigan. The
progression of Recommendations is thematic, and not necessarily subject to prioritization.
Page
Recommendation
p. 17
1. Equity. The State Board of Education (SBE), working in conjunction with the Governor’s
Office, the Michigan Legislature and broad educational interests in the state, should examine issues
regarding access to technology-delivered learning opportunities and resources for all students, then
develop and support policies which promote and improve equity.
p. 19
2. Technology Integration. The core curriculum of each school should address the use of
technology as an integral part of student learning in each content area, including specific
technology knowledge and skills needed by students. Technology should be addressed in a school
assessment plan to evaluate learning about technology and the use of technology to enhance
learning.
p. 21
3. Competency Expectations of K-12 Graduates. Schools should partner with businesses,
community colleges, universities and community organizations to keep the local school
community, including teachers and students, aware of the specific technology skills graduates of
the K-12 system must have to successfully compete in the job market or to perform in postsecondary educational environments.
p. 23
4. Training. Ongoing training opportunities that build the general level of technology expertise of
educators throughout Michigan must be significantly expanded.
p. 26
5. Technology Budgets and Training. Each school district should dedicate, on a recurring basis, a
specific and significant portion of its technology budget for ongoing staff training to assist with the
effective and efficient use of instructional technology.
p. 28
6. Teacher Competencies. The State Board of Education and leading educational organizations in
Michigan must reiterate the importance of new teachers having the ability to use information
technologies to enhance teaching and learning.
p. 30
7. Information Clearinghouse. The Michigan Department of Education (MDE) should work with
local and intermediate school districts (ISDs), regional educational media centers (REMCs),
colleges and universities, libraries and educational organizations to create an electronic, statewide
clearinghouse intended for the discovery and exchange of “best practices” in technology-centered
learning, teaching and educational administration.
p. 32
8. Technology Staffing Levels. The Michigan Department of Education (MDE) should work in
collaboration with local and intermediate school districts (ISDs), regional educational media
centers (REMCs), professional educational organizations and accrediting agencies to recommend
voluntary professional and technical staffing guidelines needed to maintain effective educational
technology programs in schools and school districts, and in regional K-12 service agencies such as
ISDs and REMCs.
p. 34
9. Supplementary Technical Support. School districts should identify and utilize individuals in
their local and school communities who have expertise in the use of appropriate technologies and
the ability to work with teachers, staff, administrators, parents and students to increase the
efficiency and effectiveness with which technology is applied in the learning environment.
p. 36
10. Infrastructure Support. The Michigan Department of Education (MDE) will work
cooperatively with state agencies, educational organizations and others to assist in the
establishment of a broad-based user group which will address issues related to and formulate
strategies to deal with: 1) coordination among local and regional initiatives to build statewide
networking capability; 2) equitable access to and affordable costs for high-quality
telecommunications services throughout Michigan; 3) technical standards and network operating
protocols; 4) support and technical assistance to ensure quality statewide network operations; and
18
All Update 2004 sections are DRAFT 060404 Version
Michigan’s State Technology Plan (1998)—Update 2004
5) financial resources and purchasing programs to benefit educational technology initiatives.
p. 38
11. Technical Standards. The Michigan Department of Education (MDE) will work cooperatively
with other state agencies and interested organizations to identify and disseminate communications
standards for voice, video and data networks, plus facilities renovation and construction standards
with optimal specifications for the design of technology-rich learning environments.
p. 39
12. Model Technology Plan. The Michigan Department of Education (MDE) will establish a
model technology plan or identify an existing model plan, including elements necessary for an
effective planning process and ease of incorporation into school improvement plans, to serve as a
guide and to accelerate the preparation of quality planning documents by local school districts.
p. 41
13. Technology Appropriation. The Michigan Legislature should provide an annual appropriation
of funds in the state’s School Aid Act specifically for the purpose of implementing technologyassisted learning programs, with districts that receive funds being subject to three basic
stipulations. Districts must: 1) have a technology plan that is in compliance with state and federal
requirements; 2) supply a matching dollar value from local resources; and 3) demonstrate that real
savings gained from participation in the federal Universal Service Fund (USF) program have been
reinvested in additional technology, technology upgrades or training, or related expenditures.
p. 43
14. Funding Flexibility. Educational interests should work with state and local policymakers to
propose and seek approval of legislation that would amend the state’s School Code to allow for
more flexibility in spending building and site sinking funds, as well as bond funds, for technologyrelated expenditures.
p. 44
15. Collaboration. Educational institutions should make every effort to maximize the funding
support and assistance available from public and private sources by establishing collaborative
arrangements with other schools, school districts, colleges, universities, libraries and similar
entities to aggregate demand for technology products and services, and where real savings result
from participation in initiatives such as the Universal Service Fund (USF) program, these dollars
should be designated for additional technology-related investments.
p. 46
16. Statewide Purchasing and Licensing. The Michigan Department of Education (MDE) should
work in conjunction with intermediate school districts (ISDs), regional educational media centers
(REMCs) and other educational organizations to support and expand existing statewide purchasing,
licensing and evaluation programs for items such as full-text online data bases, educational
software and instructional video programs, and to identify similar resources in the state’s library
community that may be available to schools at little or no charge.
p. 48
17. Advocacy. The Michigan Department of Education (MDE) must step forward to collaborate
with—and when necessary marshal and aggregate the energies and resources of—other state
agencies, state policymakers, educational organizations and institutions, libraries and businesses to
increase public awareness and promote the appropriate use of technology in the learning
community.
p. 49
18. Public Awareness. Schools must expand support for technology-rich learning environments by
creating opportunities that promote awareness of, and increase knowledge about, educational
technologies currently being used or to be used by students within their communities.
p. 51
19. Administrative Communications. Schools, school districts, the Michigan Department of
Education (MDE) and other educational institutions should use technology to enhance
communications between teachers, administrators, parents and students, to foster administrative
efficiencies and strengthen bonds within the educational community and between schools, parents
and the general public.
p. 53
20. Electronic Learning Community. A content-based, virtual educational network should be
established that incorporates instructional and administrative functions in a statewide electronic
learning community that is accessible by all schools in Michigan.
p. 54
21. State Technology Plan. Tech Plan '98 must serve as “a living document” to be reviewed,
supplemented and assessed, at minimum, on an annual basis by the State Superintendent’s
Educational Technology Advisory Group (ETAG), with new policy proposals and proposed
modifications of existing policies forwarded to the State Board of Education for consideration.
19
All Update 2004 sections are DRAFT 060404 Version
Michigan’s State Technology Plan (1998)—Update 2004
Recommendation 1: Equity
The State Board of Education (SBE), working in conjunction with the
Governor’s Office, the Michigan Legislature and broad educational interests in
the state, should examine issues regarding access to technology-delivered
learning opportunities and resources for all students, then develop and
support policies, which promote and improve equity.
Challenge: Technology is having a profound effect on education, however, schools throughout
Michigan vary widely in the benefits they experience, but also on how receptive each community
is to change. As accessibility to educational resources skyrockets through the use of technology, it
is critical that all students in Michigan have an equal opportunity to participate in technologyassisted learning. Otherwise, Michigan risks failure to serve learners at greatest risk: such as ones
with disabilities, for whom English is not their native language scoring poorly on standardized
tests, from low socio-economic backgrounds, and living in remote areas that lack access to a full
spectrum of curriculum choices and informational resources.
Rationale and Implementation: The development and support of state educational policy is a
function of the State Board of Education and the Michigan Department of Education (MDE). The
recommendation is dependent on having support from policymakers at the highest levels of state
government. It is also imperative that support be offered at the regional and local levels. Research
conducted in the process of creating policies related to equity of opportunity will help identify an
overall dollar figure needed to implement technology solutions for Michigan schools. It is
important that the settlement in the Durant case be evaluated regarding the impact it may have on
providing greater equity in technology-based learning opportunities for students.
Resources: The development of policies providing equitable access to technology to benefit
student learning would require minimal financial resources. However, the actual implementation
of such policies by schools in Michigan will involve a significant investment in technology.
Success: State policies should be adopted by December 31, 1999 that recommend schools insure
the equitable access to technology learning tools to all students.
Update 2000
Current Status: Moderate progress has been made to promote and improve equity with regard to
educational technology opportunities for Michigan's students.

USF (E-Rate) Program: Designed to provided discounts for various telecommunications
related expenditures, this federal program provides greater assistance to districts that serve
larger numbers of lower socio-economic populations. Michigan school districts and libraries
have realized discounts totaling approximately $66 million in 1998-99 and $77 million in
1999-2000, and another $55.7 million in 2000 through Wave 25 funding. A newly released
federal study from the Benton Foundation on the E-rate program showed its role in assisting
urban areas, profiling four cities including Detroit as examples of success (The E-rate in
America: A tale of four cities, 2000)

Durant Case Settlement: Approximately $245 million has been paid to all public school
districts since November 1998 as a result of the Durant Case settlement. These funds could be
used to support technology related issues. No specific expenditure data is available. However,
anecdotal information suggests that a sizeable number of Michigan school districts are using a
20
All Update 2004 sections are DRAFT 060404 Version
Michigan’s State Technology Plan (1998)—Update 2004
portion of these funds for some type of technology related investments. In a survey of 226
randomly selected district superintendents undertaken by IDEA Consultants, Inc. in 1999 for
MDE, 56% indicated their districts had used Durant funds for technology purchases.

The Technology Literacy Challenge Fund (TLCF) grant program provided funds for districts
with little or no access to technology resources. In Cycles 2 & 3 approximately $17 million
were allocated to local and intermediate school districts and public school academies. In
addition, one statewide project, "Academy for 21 st Century Schools (ACT)," provided a focus
on unaccredited schools in Cycle 2 and broadened support to other low-income schools in
Cycle 3.

The Michigan Information Network (MIN) is preparing a statewide application for the USF
program under which all districts may receive funds as a way to ease application procedures.
This statewide funding model is expected to help districts with limited resources that were
previously unable to accommodate the complex application process to be able to utilize this
program in 2001.

The Michigan Virtual High School began its program of online advanced placement courses
in 2000-2001 targeted at districts that do not have the facilities or resources to offer such
courses locally. The MVHS is committed to serving a wide range of Michigan students
including students with learning disabilities and at-risk pupils and students who can benefit
from high-quality online alternative educational environments.
Next Steps: The following actions are recommended:

Encourage school districts to take advantage of USF discounts and require schools requesting
connectivity funding under TLCF to reference how their district is leveraging USF discounts.

Ensure that school districts are aware of the statewide USF program under MIN so additional
districts will able to participate in this federal program.

MDE should ensure that TLCF grant dollars are targeted to meet needs of low-tech and midtech districts to improve equity across the state.

MDE should provide technical assistance to low-tech and mid-tech districts to help them
develop strategies to improve the level of equitable access.
Update 2004 - Equity
Current Status:

The Michigan Virtual High School (MVHS) continues to offer instructional opportunities to
the students of Michigan. MVHS is an online resource that enables Michigan high schools to
provide courses and other learning tools to students.

USF (E-Rate) Program: Michigan school districts and libraries continue to realize discounts
made available by the program. Since the e-Rate program began in 1998, Michigan schools
and libraries have received in excess of $356 million in funding commitments for
telecommunication services, internet access, and internal connections.

The federal Enhancing Education Through Technology (Ed Tech) grant program provided
funds for Michigan districts to lease laptop computers with wireless connectivity capabilities.
MDE, in partnership with Michigan Virtual University, has implemented the Freedom To
Learn initiative (FTL) which targets identified “high-need” and NCLB “high priority” schools
to receive funding for wireless technologies.

LEAs are required to provide the following information prior to receiving “state approval” of
their local educational technology plan.
21
All Update 2004 sections are DRAFT 060404 Version
Michigan’s State Technology Plan (1998)—Update 2004
o
Steps that will be taken to ensure all students and teachers have increased access to
technology (examples of issues to be addressed might include assistance to students
in high-poverty and high-need schools or to students needing assistive technologies).
Next Steps: The following actions are recommended:

MDE will work with our Regional Educational Media Centers (REMCs) and Intermediate
School Districts (ISDs) to devise and implement strategies to increase Local Education
Agency (LEA) participation in the e-Rate program.

MDE will strongly promote and advocate the use of assistive technologies by LEAs.

Grants – Incentives will be made available to those districts that have been taking advantage
of available discounts for telecommunication services, internet access, and internal
connections by actively participating in the Universal Service Fund (USF) e-Rate program.

The Technology Counts 2004 survey (Education Week, May 2004) reported discrepancies in
the access to technology that is available to Michigan students statewide, compared to those
students from high-poverty, high-minority areas. MDE must address these discrepancies and
devise strategies to provide equal access to all students, in all areas of the state of Michigan.

Ensure that all students have access to advanced technology. Special attention and
consideration will be given to districts that have a high concentration of high need/high
poverty/high minority students.
Citations:
e-Rate Central: State of Michigan statistics
http://www.e-ratecentral.com/us/stateInformation.asp?state=MI
Freedom To Learn
http://wireless.mivu.org
MDE e-Rate informational site
http://www.michigan.gov/mde/0,1607,7-140-6530_21417---,00.html
Education Week, May 2004
http://www.edweek.com/sreports/tc04/
22
All Update 2004 sections are DRAFT 060404 Version
Michigan’s State Technology Plan (1998)—Update 2004
Recommendation 2: Technology Integration
The core curriculum of each school should address the use of technology as
an integral part of student learning in each content area, including specific
technology knowledge and skills needed by students. Technology should be
addressed in a school assessment plan to evaluate learning about technology
and the use of technology to enhance learning.
Challenge: The practice and assessment of technology-assisted teaching is often limited by a lack
of student competency with technology-based tools. Without grade-specific objectives for student
competencies and practical methods of measuring those competencies, educators have no means
of evaluating the effectiveness of instructional technology. Even when educators have established
student technology competencies, they may not include authentic performance expectations.
Rationale and Implementation: Over the past several years, Michigan educators have developed
content standards and benchmarks found in the document, Working Draft Content Standards and
Benchmarks (1996). It gives guidance to Michigan schools regarding what all students need to
know and accomplish in technology and in each content area. To assist this effort, the document,
Instructional Technologies Across the Curriculum (ITAC), is being finalized by the Michigan
Department of Education (MDE) and the special task force of educational groups. It addresses the
use of technology in each content area, at each level of schooling. Further, it specifies the skills
needed for students to use technology, and to help guide the application of technology skills in
instructional activities in the core academic content areas. MDE and leading educational groups in
Michigan must work together to disseminate state recommendations. State and local guidelines
should be reviewed regularly and amended as needed to keep current with evolving technology
and educational practices.
Resources: MDE will finalize and, assisted by state educational organizations, disseminate the
ITAC toolkit by October 1, 1998. Primary distribution will be via MDE’s web pages (MDEnet),
with supplementary efforts to ensure that the document reaches school administrators throughout
the state. At the regional and local levels, substantial time commitments are needed from school
and district staffs, along with parents, library media specialists and business leaders for the
preparation, adoption and implementation of technology guidelines in local curricula.
Success: The initial step in determining the success of this recommendation is the finalization of
the ITAC toolkit by MDE, and the subsequent distribution of these guidelines to educators. Longterm success will be measured by the number of schools and school districts using the ITAC
toolkit in the development and use of technology across their own curriculum.
Update 2000
Current Status: Progress on this recommendation has been sporadic. The draft content standards
have been formally adopted as the Michigan Curriculum Framework (MCF), which includes
specific strands and benchmarks for Technology Education. ISDs and local districts have used the
MCF to develop school curricula which integrates technology into the core content areas. Work on
these projects has been assisted by TLCF and Goals 2000 grants to local districts. Many projects
are using Instructional Technologies Across the Curriculum (ITAC), developed under the
direction of MDE to accompany the Michigan Curriculum Framework.
MDE created the Technology-Using Educator On-Loan Program through the TLCF grant
program. For the 1998-1999 school year the Educator On-Loan, Marilyn Western, traveled across
the state working with district staff members on strategies for integrating technology into the
curriculum. The range of inservice ranged from the one-computer classroom to lab settings. In the
1999-2000 school year, two Educators On-Loan, Jane Frank and Jody Whitmer, expanded the
23
All Update 2004 sections are DRAFT 060404 Version
Michigan’s State Technology Plan (1998)—Update 2004
direct support to teachers. Beginning in Fall 2000, Becky Skutt is continuing work with
classrooms around the state.
For the TLCF Cycle 3 program, approximately $2.5 million was awarded in the 1999-2000 school
year to eight statewide projects. Six of these projects were devoted primarily for professional
development targeted for integration of technology into the curriculum.

One TLCF statewide project focused on developing “Best Practices in Using Technology” as
an educational tool with distribution of a CD-ROM across the state containing model lessons.
Training was also offered to local districts on using this tool to develop lesson plans which
integrate technology.

Another TLCF statewide project, the "Michigan Teacher Network" provides a clearinghouse
of core content curriculum materials. These Internet resources are linked to the Michigan
Curriculum Framework and focus on technology integration for teachers.
At the local level, technology integration was a major component of TLCF projects. In Cycle 2,
57% of districts averaged 20% of their awards towards curriculum integration. In Cycle 3, this
increased to 60% including integration activities with an average of 29% of their awards.
Funding for four new centers under the Michigan Technology Improvement Program (MTIP) has
been allocated through the TLCF program which includes program areas related to identification
of research-based best practice models and dissemination of results in late 2000.
Next Steps: Recommended actions include the following:

MDE should review and revise the ITAC document in light of the new National Education
Technology Standards for Students published by the International Society for Technology in
Education in 1999.

MDE as well as local and intermediate school districts should continue to support the
identification and selection of “best practices” in technology integration.

MDE, in cooperation with ISDs and local districts, should develop a professional judgment
evaluation rubric for technology integration programs.

Secure state funding so that State initiatives in the area of teacher competencies, student
competencies, and curriculum integration can be achieved.

MDE should coordinate curriculum projects focusing on MCF to integrate technology within
the core academic disciplines and use technology in implementation and dissemination
efforts.
Citations:
Michigan Curriculum Framework
http://cdp.mde.state.mi.us/MCF/default.html
Instructional Technology Across The Curriculum (ITAC)—
K-12 Instructional Technology Use
http://cdp.mde.state.mi.us/Technology/ITAC/default.html
Michigan Teacher Network
http://mtn.merit.edu
GLEN Best Practices
http://glen.cc/
Update 2004 – Technology Integration
Current Status:

24
The "Michigan Teacher Network" (MTN) continues to provide valuable information for
teachers and parents. MTN resources are linked to the Michigan Curriculum Framework
(MCF) and focus on technology integration for teachers.
All Update 2004 sections are DRAFT 060404 Version
Michigan’s State Technology Plan (1998)—Update 2004


LEAs are required to provide the following information prior to receiving “state approval” of
their local educational technology plan.
o
Specific goals that are aligned with state or national standards for using advanced
technology to improve student academic achievement.
o
Strategies that describe how technology will be used to improve the academic
achievement, including technology literacy, of all students.
o
A description on how the district will identify and promote curricula and teaching
strategies that integrate technology effectively into curricula and instruction.
o
A description and timeline on how technology will be integrated into curricula and
instruction.
o
A general description of the process by which local educational technology plans are
evaluated, including what measures will be used and how success will be determined.
MDE is utilizing a variety of interactive multimedia to provide resources for several curricular
areas:
o
“Clarifying Language in Michigan Benchmarks” (MI CLiMB) is a product that contains
the clarification of each core area benchmark, and provides instructional and assessment
examples.
o
Grade Level Content Expectations (GLCE). Nationally recognized expectations represent
many months of dedicated contribution by classroom teachers, curriculum experts,
academicians and Michigan Department of Education staff and consultants. Expectations
were developed for two content areas, English Language Arts and Mathematics and span
grades kindergarten through eighth grade.

The REMC association of Michigan collaborates in the Michigan Instructional Television
(M-ITV) project, which provides quality instructional resources aligned with the Michigan
Curriculum Framework. Membership in M-ITV provides many benefits such as access to 43
series with over 300 video programs. M-ITV programs are selected based upon teacher
evaluation and recommendation. These programs are leased on a statewide basis that provides
significant cost savings.

As teacher preparation program standards continue to be developed and approved by the State
Board of Education, the process has emphasized the incorporation of technology concepts and
skills related to particular disciplines.
The Michigan Department of Education, with COATT, MACUL, and TEAM as co-sponsors,
has developed a series of workshops to assist teacher preparation institutions in responding to
the challenges of meeting the Seventh Standard of the Entry-Level Standards for Michigan
Teachers (ELSMT), assessing candidate proficiencies, and integrating technology throughout
teacher preparation programs. Workshops were held in fall 2003 and spring 2004 with
additional workshops planned for 2004-2005. As an outgrowth of the workshops, MDE,
COATT, MACUL, and TEAM are discussing ways to highlight best practices and make them
readily available on the Web.
Next Steps: The following actions are recommended:

Encourage LEAs to integrate technology plans into their school improvement plans.

Develop technology grade level assessments, both paper and online, to measure student
competencies.
25
All Update 2004 sections are DRAFT 060404 Version
Michigan’s State Technology Plan (1998)—Update 2004

Revise the technology grade level benchmarks to bring them into alignment with the
International Society of Technology in Education’s (ISTE) National Educational Technology
Standards for Students (NETS-S).

Revise the technology grade level benchmarks to bring them into alignment with the
Technology for All Americans Project’s “Standards for Technology Literacy” (STL).

Coordinate efforts with various associations (MCSS, MCTM, MRA, MCTE, MSTA, etc.) to
ensure that their Web sites contain reciprocal links and resource references to the Michigan
Curriculum Framework.

Identify several assessment tools that could be used to assist districts in evaluating to what
extent technology is being used and its effectiveness in increasing student achievement. (e.g.
National Central Regional Educational Laboratory’s “enGauge” and Taking a Good Look at
Instructional Technology (TAGLIT)).

Refine existing technology standards and benchmarks to include examples of technology
integration within all content areas.

Update the existing Instructional Technology Across the Curriculum (ITAC) document.
Citations:
Michigan Curriculum Framework
http://www.michigan.gov/documents/MichiganCurriculumFramework_8172_7.pdf
Instructional Technology Across The Curriculum (ITAC)— K-12 Instructional
Technology Use
http://techplan.org/documents/itac-mde1996.pdf
Educational Technology Plan Approval Checklist
http://techplan.org/requirements-submission
Standards for Technology Literacy (STL)
http://www.iteawww.org/TAA/Publications/STL/STLMainPage.htm
Education Week, Technology Counts 2004 results
http://www.edweek.com/sreports/tc04/
26
Michigan Teacher Network
http://mtn.merit.edu
ISTE National Educational
Technology Standards
http://cnets.iste.org
MI CliMB
http://www.miclimb.net
enGauge
http://www.ncrel.org/engauge
TAGLIT
http://www.taglit.org
All Update 2004 sections are DRAFT 060404 Version
Michigan’s State Technology Plan (1998)—Update 2004
Recommendation 3: Competency Expectations of K-12
Graduates
Schools should partner with businesses, community colleges, universities and
community organizations to keep the local school community, including
teachers and students, aware of the specific technology skills graduates of the
K-12 system must have to successfully compete in the job market or to
perform in post-secondary educational environments.
Challenge: Not all teachers and learners have an awareness of how technology is used in
everyday life and the workplace, nor have they had experience with it, but they should. Also,
teachers and learners should know what higher education expects its students to be able to do with
technology-based learning.
Rationale and Implementation: Businesses, community colleges, universities and community
organizations can all work to establish partnerships with schools, but schools should not wait for
others to take the initiative. There should be communication links between schools and higher
education institutions. The continued support of initiatives through the Career Preparation System
(including Career and Technical Education, Tech Prep and School-To-Work programs) would be
beneficial. In partnerships with businesses educators, students and parents could visit the
workplace to view practical applications of technologies. Students could have technology-based
work experiences and opportunities to develop technology-related skills. Also, internships can
place teachers with local technology-based businesses during summer months. In communities
where opportunities are limited or nonexistent, electronic partnerships with distant companies can
be explored.
Resources: Staffing and funding implications are strongest at the local level. Programs that create
opportunities for students to learn in the workplace, as well as opportunities for businesses to
contribute to the learning experience, may need to be supplemented. Some schools may lack
computer equipment and software needed to access regional and state work-based education and
employment opportunity data bases. Schools must also provide staff opportunities to interact with
higher education institutions.
Success: Measuring the success of this recommendation will take two forms. First, there should be
an increase in the number of school partnerships involving businesses, community colleges,
universities, and community organizations. Second, the number of students participating in these
partnerships will increase. The number of Michigan schools establishing local partnerships should
be included in an annual survey of Michigan schools, such as the one conducted by Quality
Education Data (QED) and the Michigan Department of Education (MDE) in 1997. Some data
may also be collected by the Michigan Jobs Commission.
Update 2000
Current Status: In a 1999 survey conducted for MDE by IDEA Consultants, Inc., a random
sample of district superintendents indicated that 75% of districts had written guidelines related to
technological skills that graduating students are expected to have when they complete high school.
Next Steps: Some possible steps should include:

27
Review/revise the K-12 student technology education competencies, ensuring these are
aligned with the International Society for Technology in Education (ISTE) student
standards released in 1999 and the International Technology Education Association
Standards for Technological Literacy updated in 2000;
All Update 2004 sections are DRAFT 060404 Version
Michigan’s State Technology Plan (1998)—Update 2004

Exchange information about post-K-12 expectations regarding technology capabilities;

Reaffirm instructional technology standards across the curriculum;

Gather data regarding the type and number of participants of partnerships between school
districts and local businesses, community colleges, universities, and community
organizations; and

Encourage districts to work with the Michigan Department of Career Development on
school-to-work programs
Citations:
Michigan Center for Career and Technical Education
(MCCTE)
http://mccte.educ.msu.edu/
Michigan Dept. of Career Development
http://www.state.mi.us/career/
Michigan’s School-To-Work Network (STW)
http://irn.tcimet.net/STW/Pdocs/STW-Welcome.cfm
ISTE NETS for Students
http://www.iste.org/standards/index.html
ITEA Standards for Technological Literacy
http://www.iteawww.org/TAA/STLstds.htm
Update 2004 – Competency Expectations of K-12 Graduates
Current Status:

In addition to advocating NETS for Students, MDE strongly promotes adherence to the ISTE
National Educational Standards for Teachers and Administrators.
Next Steps: The following actions are recommended:

Continue to encourage LEA adoption and implementation of the ISTE National Education
Standards for students.

Review the Standards for Technology Literacy (ITEA, 2002) and consider for possible State
adoption.
Citations:
ISTE NETS for Students
http://cnets.iste.org/students/index.shtml
ISTE NETS for Teachers
http://cnets.iste.org/teachers
28
ISTE NETS for Administrators
http://cnets.iste.org/administrators
All Update 2004 sections are DRAFT 060404 Version
Michigan’s State Technology Plan (1998)—Update 2004
Recommendation 4: Training
Ongoing training opportunities that build the general level of technology
expertise of educators throughout Michigan must be significantly expanded.
Challenge: The shortfall in training and professional development opportunities is routinely
identified as Michigan’s most pressing need related to technology-assisted teaching and learning.
All educators, but especially teachers, must upgrade their skills if technology is to be effectively
integrated into teaching and the curriculum, and also support the administrative responsibilities of
schools. More training opportunities are needed to increase the capabilities and comfort levels of
educators with new technologies that possess instructional and administrative value. Without such
training and subsequent technology use, schools have difficulty demonstrating a fair return on
dollars invested in technology hardware, software, and infrastructure.
Rationale and Implementation: An online survey conducted by the State Superintendent’s
Educational Technology Advisory Group (ETAG) in October 1997 produced overwhelming
support—over 95% of more than 400 respondents—for increasing training opportunities to build
the general level of technology expertise among educators in Michigan. This is not surprising
since Education Week (November 1997) reported that just 10 percent of Michigan’s teachers had
at least nine hours of technology training. The MDE should act as a facilitator in increasing the
number of training opportunities, working in conjunction with educational organizations, colleges
and universities, local and intermediate school districts (ISDs), and regional educational media
centers (REMCs) and other non profit and private agencies. A prompt review of the training needs
of teachers and other educators is needed, followed by an assessment of which training needs are
being met, in whole or in part. The critical next step is supplementing existing training programs
to meet the shortfall in training opportunities. Delivery mechanisms must be explored that help
overcome the shortage of substitute teachers, which prevents many teachers from being released
from regular classroom duties. Technology itself can be an alternative strategy in helping to
deliver training of all types, including the acquisition of continuing education units (CEUs) by
teachers. A model of multi-institutional collaboration has been SupportNet, a one-year initiative of
the Merit Network, funded through the Michigan Public Service Commission, to deliver Internet
training and help desk services to a core of the state’s educational community.
Resources: Staff resources of MDE, especially through 1998, are necessary to launch the
implementation of this recommendation. Since the expense of training programs is significant,
considerable input and support is essential from educational organizations and institutions, with a
long-term commitment that emphasizes leadership and financial support necessary from local
school districts. To help leverage local and regional resources, MDE will earmark a significant
amount of the state’s apportionment of the federal Technology Literacy Challenge Fund program
in 1998 to provide financial support for technology training initiatives. Collaborative training
initiatives involving schools, school districts, libraries, health care facilities, nonprofit groups and
private businesses can help minimize training costs not only in rural and remote regions of
Michigan, but also in the state’s urban and central city areas.
Success: A review of technology training needs and existing training programs will be completed
by a coalition of educational organizations and institutions, led by MDE, no later than June 1,
1998 (or an alternate date pending a schedule for receiving applications and making funding
decisions for the state’s administration of the Technology Literacy Challenge Fund program). By
September 1, 1998, the State Board of Education will approve Technology Literacy Challenge
Fund grants intended to aid in establishing and/or supplementing existing training programs.
Ultimate success will be achieved when a significant majority of teachers and other educators in
Michigan have the skills necessary to better incorporate technology into the educational and
administrative missions of schools. An annual survey of K-12 schools, such as that conducted by
29
All Update 2004 sections are DRAFT 060404 Version
Michigan’s State Technology Plan (1998)—Update 2004
MDE and Quality Education Data (QED) in 1997, could be instrumental in the collection of this
information.
Update 2000
Current Status: Progress on a statewide review of training needs and existing training programs
was not completed. However, a number of new training opportunities have been implemented both
through MDE’s direct efforts and through cooperative projects that include partnerships with
businesses and universities. While specific training needs were not identified, 83% of a random
sample of superintendents surveyed for MDE by IDEA Consultants, Inc. rated training as their
highest technology priority in 1999. According to the 1998-99 QED survey, districts offered an
average of 100 total hours of training for teachers but 60% of this was for basic operations and
applications.

State, regional and district Technology Literacy Challenge Fund (TLCF) grants included
training components.
Statewide projects in Cycle 2 and 3 including teacher professional development were
"Academy for the 21st Century," "Best Practices of Technology Integration," "Michigan
Teacher Network" and the "Michigan Technology Training Resource." "Implementing
Technology in an Educational Context" provided professional development focusing on
administrators and school board members.
In addition, ten regional TLCF Cycle 2 projects were funded in the 1998-1999 year for a
total of $5 million with 20-40% of those dollars supporting professional development.
Regional plans in Cycle 4 were required to focus on professional development or
connectivity, with a minimum of 20-40% for training.
At the local level, 77% of TLCF projects included professional development with an
average of 30% of funding per project covering this activity. In Cycle 3, 86% of funded
projects included a professional development component.

Next Day Grants in 1997-98 and 1998-99 included projects specifically targeted at teacher
training.

MDE serves on the Board and is providing support to the “Ameritech Technology Academy,”
a project to train 5000 teachers from 2000-2001 under the guidance of the Michigan
Association of Computer-related technology Users in Learning (MACUL).

Working cooperatively, school districts and teacher preparation programs are creating
professional development partnerships to deliver state-of-the-art technology instruction to
enhance the performance of both students and teachers. Examples include the Genesee
Intermediate School District’s GET-IT program and Lansing School District’s Educational
Technology Certification partnership, both supported by TLCF funds.

Statewide training developments have been highlighted in a recent article profiling Michigan
programs, one of four high-quality statewide models featured in the national journal. (E.
Hoffman & G. Thompson. (2000). “Putting the Research to Work: Professional Development
Models from Michigan.” TechTrends 44(2): 20-23.

The Michigan Technology Improvement Program, funded under Cycle 4 TLCF, includes
professional development as part of the Sustained Learning Regions center which is a joint
effort of MDE and ISDs around the state.
Next Steps: Under the leadership of MDE, an infrastructure system is needed for the collection,
evaluation, and dissemination of information from these programs. MDE will continue to earmark
a significant amount of the TLCF apportionment in future funding cycles to training and support
for professional development.
30
All Update 2004 sections are DRAFT 060404 Version
Michigan’s State Technology Plan (1998)—Update 2004
Citation:
SupportNet, Merit Network, Inc.
http://www.merit.edu/k12.michigan/supportnet/
Governor’s Next Day Teacher Innovation Grants
http://www.trico-associates.com/nextday/
Ameritech Technology Academy
http://ameritechacademy.org/
Update 2004 - Training
Current Status:

LEAs are required to provide the following information prior to receiving “state approval” of
their local educational technology plan.
o
o
o
Professional development strategies are in place to ensure that ALL staff and
administrators are made aware of how to use available technologies to improve student
learning.
An indication that the professional development offerings should set the groundwork for
integration rather than a narrow focus on skill development.
A timeline for the implementation of various types of professional development training.

As a part of the federally funded (Ed Tech grant) Freedom to Learn (FTL) project, Michigan
Virtual University has developed a professional development program that targets teachers,
technology staff, paraprofessionals, and administrators participating in the FTL program.

In collaboration with the Michigan Virtual University, MDE has created Michigan LearnPort,
a statewide professional development portal for Michigan educators. The goal is to develop a
robust site that enables individuals to participate in learning communities, create professional
learning plans, and find resources that will help them meet their professional goals.

Since 2001, hundreds of Michigan teachers have participated in the Intel “Teach for the
Future” project. Teachers learn how, when, and where to incorporate technology tools and
resources into their current curriculum. They are instructed on how best to create assessment
tools and align lesson plans with state and national standards. The program incorporates
hands-on use of the Internet, Web page design, and multimedia software. The goal is to
prepare today’s teachers and students for tomorrow’s demands.

To date, more that 2,500 Michigan superintendents and principals have participated in the Bill
and Melinda Gates Foundation project LEADing the Future (LTF). LEADing the Future is a
unique, hands-on professional development opportunity, funded by the Bill and Melinda
Gates Foundation, that focuses on using handheld technology and specialized applications to
access and use data to make informed leadership decisions.

The ATA Academy is a staff development program designed to increase educators’
technology skills for the benefit of Michigan students. The program helps educators integrate
the use of technology into their curriculum and instructional strategies. The program is built
on a train-the-trainer model and has provided training for more than 700 building-level teams,
who then provide technology integration training to other educators in their individual
schools. Since 2000-01, ATA workshops have resulted in a training force of more than 2,800
educators who have impacted thousands of their colleagues and potentially tens of thousands
of Michigan students. MDE continues to partner with and support ATA.
31
All Update 2004 sections are DRAFT 060404 Version
Michigan’s State Technology Plan (1998)—Update 2004
Next Steps: The following actions are recommended:

Continue promoting teacher and administrator training within the state.

Changes in the state requirements for professional development to require a designated
amount of PD is identified for training in the effective use of technology to improve student
learning.

Review the need for reinstatement of administrator certification that includes competencies in
leadership for integrating technology that focuses on improving student learning.

Ensure that teacher preparation institutions are preparing all teacher candidates to successfully
utilize technology to improve student learning through mastery of the Entry Level Standards
for Michigan teachers.

Identify resources for the continuation and expansion of administrative professional
development opportunities.

Continue to utilize the Gates LEADing the Future grant in partnership with the various
administrator professional associations to deliver professional development workshops for
principals and superintendents.

Revise the standards for the preparation and continuing professional development of school
administrators to include leadership skills in using technology to improve student learning.

The Technology Counts 2004 survey (Education Week, May 2004) reports that within
Michigan, 27% of our high-poverty schools and 44% of our high-minority schools, at least
half of the teachers consider themselves “beginners” when it comes to using technology.
Professional development opportunities will be designed and targeted toward these audiences.
Citation:
Bill and Melinda Gates Foundation
http://gatesfoundation.org/default.htm
LEADing the Future
http://leadmichigan.org
INTEL Innovation in Education
http://www97.intel.com/education/
32
Ameritech Technology Academy
http://ameritechacademy.org
Freedom To Learn
http://wireless.mivu.org
LearnPort:
http://www.learnport.org/
All Update 2004 sections are DRAFT 060404 Version
Michigan’s State Technology Plan (1998)—Update 2004
Recommendation 5: Technology Budgets and Training
Each school district should dedicate, on a recurring basis, a specific and
significant portion of its technology budget for ongoing staff training to assist
with the effective and efficient use of instructional technology.
Challenge: A significant percentage of public and nonpublic school teachers in Michigan are
characterized as having only beginning technology skills or, worse, no skills at all, according to
ProjectEdTech, a 1997 survey of K-12 school buildings in the state by Quality Education Data
(QED) and the Michigan Department of Education (MDE). Yet support for technology training for
teachers and other school staff to integrate technology into the educational and administrative
missions is inconsistent from one school to the next.
Rationale and Implementation: As educators integrate technology and related
telecommunication services into their curriculum and their budgets, they often overlook the need
for money to boost the technical capabilities of teachers and staff. Establishing a budget item
dedicated to technology training is a constant reminder to schools and school districts to invest in
human resources. This strategy should be reflected in a district’s technology plan. Intermediate
school districts (ISDs) and regional educational media centers (REMCs) should continue to assist
local districts in planning and implementing this recommendation.
Resources: Local school districts must be creative in using funds from a variety of sources to
assist in ongoing technology training, including annual operating dollars, grant funds and savings
achieved from participation in the federal Universal Service Fund. A 1995 report (Teachers and
Technology: Making the Connection) of the U.S. Office of Technology Assessment suggested that
at least 30 percent of a school district’s technology spending should be dedicated to staff training.
States such as Texas have adopted that model, but a survey by Quality Education Data in 1996-97
reported that, on average, districts earmark only five percent of their technology budgets for
training. By comparison, estimates for private sector investments in technology, computer and/or
technical skills training range from 30-40 percent of total training funds (American Society for
Training and Development), to 30 percent of total operating budgets (Training Magazine). Others
informally claim that private sector institutions routinely invest 50 percent of a total technology
budget in technology training and support.
Success: The successful implementation of this recommendation depends upon schools
establishing a regular budget item that addresses the need to support technology training for
teachers and staff. Further, these allocated funds must be substantive enough to address the
identified training needs.
Update 2000
Current Status: According to the 1998-99 Quality Education Data survey, local school districts
were spending less than 10% of their average $540,000 technology budgets on professional
development. This was an increase over the 8% in the year before. To assist in promoting staff
development, TLCF Cycle 4 Local and Regional applications required 20-40% of the grant
amount to be allocated for professional development either through grant dollars or in-kind
contributions by the district or other financial sources. TLCF funds for professional development
were included in a significant number of local grant projects in all cycles.
Next Steps: Some deeply entrenched barriers toward progress on this recommendation must be
removed—in particular, the lack of investment in staff development. The U.S. Department of
Education recommends that 30% of technology budgets be spent on technology training for
teachers in the national technology plan, (Getting America's Students Ready for the 21st Century,
1996).
33
All Update 2004 sections are DRAFT 060404 Version
Michigan’s State Technology Plan (1998)—Update 2004
Citations:
ProjectEdTech (1996-97): Tech Survey Report, Quality
Education Data and Michigan Department of Education
http://www.mde.state.mi.us/tplan/qed.shtml
Universal Service Fund Information Page Merit Network
http://www.merit.edu/k12.michigan/usf/
Update 2004 – Technology Budgets and Training
Current Status:

The national Enhancing Education Though Technology (Ed Tech) initiative includes a
requirement that a minimum of 25% of requested funds be designated for technology
professional development. MDE strictly monitors all requests for these funds to ensure
compliance to the 25% requirement.

LEAs are required to provide the following information prior to receiving “state approval” of
their local educational technology plan.
o Budgets are detailed annually for each year covered by the plan.
o A financial plan for long-term investment and sustainability, including coordination
and leveraging through local, state, and federal programs and/or grants has been
developed.

Michigan Department of Education staff present annual workshops for regional e-Rate
contacts to provide them with updates on modifications and changes in the e-Rate program.

MDE staff is available to assist LEAs in the application process for e-Rate.

MDE staff has presented several videoconferences to assist LEA technology coordinators in
the development of their local educational technology plan.
Next Steps: The following actions are recommended:

MDE will work with the REMC association and ISDs to devise strategies for increasing local
participation in the e-Rate program to ensure that Michigan is taking maximum advantage of
funding opportunities for our local districts.

MDE, REMCs, and ISDs will continue to assist LEAs to make certain they are taking full
advantage of available federal, state, and local resources to expand their technology access
and use.
Citations:
Enhancing Education Through Technology
http://www.ed.gov/programs/edtech/index.html
34
Universal Service Fund Information
http://www.sl.universalservice.org
All Update 2004 sections are DRAFT 060404 Version
Michigan’s State Technology Plan (1998)—Update 2004
Recommendation 6: Teacher Competencies
The State Board of Education and leading educational organizations in
Michigan must reiterate the importance of new teachers having the ability to
use information technologies to enhance teaching and learning.
School districts must be encouraged to include technological competency as
an aspect of teacher hiring and evaluation.
Challenge: The use of technology in classrooms is growing in Michigan, but according to
ProjectEdTech, a 1997 survey of K-12 school buildings in Michigan by Quality Education Data
(QED) and the Michigan Department of Education (MDE), public schools and nonpublic schools
rated only 15 percent and 11 percent of their teachers, respectively, as having advanced
technology skills. When hiring new teachers, districts should consider applicants’ knowledge of
and ability to use technology.
Rationale and Implementation: Teachers must be increasingly proficient not only in the
operation of computers, video equipment and similar technologies, but also in their ability to
instruct students in the use and application of these technologies. The State Board of Education
and MDE have an immediate role in implementing this recommendation through the approval of a
seventh skill standard—one that emphasizes the importance of new teachers having an ability to
use information technology to enhance learning—to the Entry Level Standards for Michigan
Teachers.
This will lead to technology skills being incorporated into the other six skill areas to achieve
maximum effectiveness. Colleges and universities that train teachers should evaluate their
programs, including the degree to which they include technology-related recommendations of the
National Council for Accreditation of Teacher Education (NCATE). Local school districts should
include the use of technology skills as an important component in the hiring and evaluation of
teachers. Some local districts may need to develop policies that address technology-based
performance expectations for teachers.
Resources: Financial resources necessary to implement this recommendation are relatively minor,
unless a college or university must make major investments to effectively train new teachers to
comply with seventh skill standard requirements. The ongoing approval and review processes
administered through MDE’s Office Professional Preparation Services already monitor
compliance with state guidelines and should incur no significant cost increase due to a new
standard.
Success: A key measurement of accomplishment is the implementation of the seventh skill
standard focusing on technology to the Entry Level Standards for Michigan Teachers, then its
adoption by colleges and universities that train new teachers. Long-term, but less easily measured
success would be illustrated by having all local school districts in Michigan employ technology
competency as an important aspect of teacher hiring and evaluation. MDE could incorporate a
question addressing formal technology training for teachers in an annual survey of K-12 schools,
such as the one conducted with Quality Education Data (QED) in 1997.
Update 2000
Current Status: In the 1998-99 QED survey, school administrators identified 25% of teachers as
having advanced or instructor-level technology skills.
In July 1998, the State Board of Education approved the addition of a technology standard to the
Entry-Level Standards for Michigan Teachers. This technology-focused standard, based on the
35
All Update 2004 sections are DRAFT 060404 Version
Michigan’s State Technology Plan (1998)—Update 2004
International Society for Technology in Education (ISTE) standards, is commonly referred to as
the Seventh Standard because it was appended to the existing six standards previously adopted by
the state. The new technology standard is being implemented by teacher preparation institutions in
developing instructional programs and for assessing student teacher competence in the use of
technology for teaching and learning. Compliance with the standard is being monitored during the
periodic review of each institution’s teacher preparation programs on a five-year cycle.
The Consortium for Outstanding Achievement in Teaching with Technology (COATT), a
coalition of the state’s schools and colleges of education, was established through the efforts of
Senator Carl Levin to recognize preservice teachers who demonstrate excellence in the use of
technology to enhance student learning. Assessment for the award is based on the seventh
standard. The first preservice awards were made in spring 2000. A program to recognize
outstanding technology using practicing teachers began in late 2000.
While the seventh standard is supporting improved technology skills for new teachers, the 1999
Quality Education Data survey indicated that only 20% of schools required teachers to
demonstrate technology capabilities in the hiring process. Michigan does not require technology
training for continuing certification, a factor shared with 45 other states according to data reported
by Education Week in 1999. In a 1999 survey of school superintendents conducts by IDEA
Consultants, Inc., 13% indicated their districts had written technology competency guidelines for
their teachers.
The Michigan Department of Education is working with a task force to develop a graduate-level
endorsement for educational technology as part of teacher certification. This endorsement will be
based on the ISTE standards.
Next Steps: As a result of the adoption of the seventh standard and the ensuing programs for
preservice teachers by Michigan schools and colleges of education, the models are in place for
identifying or developing technology-related competencies for practicing K-12 teachers or for
inclusion in a new educational technology endorsement program for previously-certified teachers.
Such a model should also incorporate the ISTE Technology Standards for Teachers released in
June 2000.
The Seventh standard should be widely disseminated to intermediate and local school districts so
school administrators will be aware of what newly prepared teachers may be expected to know.
Competencies are important for all educators, not just teachers. Standards should be developed for
administrators at the state and local levels.
Citations:
ProjectEdTech (1996-97): Michigan: State Tech Survey
Report, Quality Education Data and Michigan Department
of Education
http://www.mde.state.mi.us/tplan/qed.shtml
36
Seventh Standard, Entry-Level Standards for Michigan
Teachers, Michigan Department of Education
http://www.mde.state.mi.us/tplan/presrvtech/index.shtml
National Educational Technology Standards for Teachers,
International Society for Technology in Education (ISTE)
http://cnets.iste.org/index3.html
All Update 2004 sections are DRAFT 060404 Version
Michigan’s State Technology Plan (1998)—Update 2004
Update 2004 – Teacher Competencies
Current Status:

The Consortium for Outstanding Achievement in Teaching with Technology (COATT) is a
partnership between Michigan universities, colleges, schools, and educational professional
organizations aimed at making our state first in the nation when it comes to training
preservice and practicing teachers to use technology as an effective teaching tool. Through
award programs for outstanding teachers, professional development opportunities, and
innovative and collaborative projects, COATT promotes the integration of technology into
teaching and learning in Michigan.

The Consortium for Outstanding Achievement in Teaching with Technology (COATT) has
grown to include __ teacher preparation institutions. As of May 2004, ___ teacher candidates
have now received COATT awards. In addition, an MCOATT award was developed for inservice teachers and ___ have received that award.
The Michigan Department of Education, with COATT, MACUL, and TEAM as co-sponsors,
has developed a series of workshops to assist teacher preparation institutions in responding to
the challenges of meeting the Seventh Standard of the Entry-Level Standards for Michigan
Teachers (ELSMT), assessing candidate proficiencies, and integrating technology throughout
teacher preparation programs. Workshops were held in fall 2003 and spring 2004 with
additional workshops planned for 2004-2005. Each teacher preparation institution has
identified one individual who has overall responsibility for ensuring that all teacher
candidates in his/her institution meet the Seventh Standard.
A graduate-level endorsement for educational technology was created by the State Board of
Education (SBE) in June 2002 and teacher preparation program standards based on the work
of ISTE were adopted. As of May 2004, one program has been approved and six other
institutions are in the process of developing programs that will meet the state criteria. The
institution whose program is approved program is offering much of the required coursework
online.
The SBE updated the Seventh Standard in October 2002 to align with the revised ISTE-NETS
standards for teachers. This work was done jointly with the MDE and the SBE Embracing the
Information Age Task Force. The Seventh Standard was added to the ELSMT in 1998 so that
the new emphasis on technology would stand out and be easily addressed. Revisions are now
being considered to integrate more technology concepts into the other six standards and to
include concepts related to a broader definition of technology literacy. The Seventh Standard
currently focuses on educational technology.
Standards for the preparation of school principals approved by the SBE in February 2004
include knowledge and skills related to technology. Although approval of principal
preparation programs against these standards are voluntary (Michigan currently does not
certify school administrators), many institutions have expressed interest in having their
programs reviewed and approved.
Teacher preparation institutions are reviewed every 5-7 years on a Periodic Review/Program
Evaluation cycle. Plans are in development for the 2005-2012 cycle to focus on the
collection, analysis, and use of outcome data for continuous program improvement. The data
collected should provide evidence of each institution's ability to prepare candidates that meet
the ELSMT and related proficiencies.
37
All Update 2004 sections are DRAFT 060404 Version
Michigan’s State Technology Plan (1998)—Update 2004
Next Steps: The following actions are recommended:

Promote the International Society for Technology in Education / National Council for
Accreditation of Teacher Education (ISTE/NCATE) standards for teacher preparation
programs.

Continue to support and promote the COATT project and identify methods of increasing
participation in the project.

Develop models for effective implementation of the 7th standard for Entry Level teachers.

Identify tools for assessing the technology skills of teacher candidates.

Ensure that teacher preparation institutions are preparing all teacher candidates to successfully
utilize technology to improve student learning through the mastery of the Entry Level
standards for Michigan teachers.
Citations:
ISTE / NCATE Standards for Educational Technology
Programs
http://cnets.iste.org/ncate
NCATE
http://www.ncate.org
38
Seventh Standard, Entry-Level Standards for Michigan Teachers,
Michigan Department of Education
http://www.michigan.gov/documents/elstandards_21893_7.doc
National Educational Technology Standards for Teachers,
International Society for Technology in Education (ISTE)
http://cnets.iste.org/index3.html
All Update 2004 sections are DRAFT 060404 Version
Michigan’s State Technology Plan (1998)—Update 2004
Recommendation 7: Information Clearinghouse
The Michigan Department of Education (MDE) should work with local and
intermediate school districts (ISDs), regional educational media centers
(REMCs), colleges and universities, libraries and educational organizations to
create an electronic, statewide clearinghouse intended for the discovery and
exchange of “best practices” in technology-centered learning, teaching and
educational administration.
Challenge: The application of technology in education lacks the definition and standards of an
established discipline, yet educators are expected to know about a vast range of technology-related
issues. Topics include integrating technology across the curriculum protecting the confidentiality
of school records, addressing student access to inappropriate electronic content, and addressing the
“Year 2000” problem. It is an arduous and time-consuming task for teachers, media specialists and
school administrators to locate documents that identify research and methodologies focusing on
“best practices” in the integration of technology into the curriculum and school management
functions.
Rationale and Implementation: A clearinghouse would enable educators to learn from the
applied research and practice of other education professionals. The coordination of this
recommendation rests with MDE, though the identification and evaluation of many “best
practices” models must be accomplished in conjunction with local school districts, ISDs, REMCs,
colleges and universities, and other educational organizations. MDE is pioneering a clearinghouse
of this type (the Michigan Statewide Systemic Initiative’s Dialogue Web project) and has created
other, smaller scale resources (a technology planning page to assist with the update of the State
Technology Plan). All information providers must feel ownership of the clearinghouse, as all
would be expected to contribute to its resource base.
Resources: Resource obligations would be nominal for each participating organization sharing
technology-related information of use to schools, but requirements on the part of the institution
managing the clearinghouse might involve more significant staffing and information
dissemination capabilities and commitments. MDE may earmark a small portion of federal dollars
allocated under the 1998 Technology Literacy Challenge Fund program to help launch a state
educational technology clearinghouse. Much dissemination of “best practices” models can be
accomplished electronically.
Success: The creation of an organizational framework in which a statewide information
technology clearinghouse would operate is a first step toward success, to be accompanied by an
evaluation process for “best practices” models. This phase should be completed by October 1,
1998. The launching of the service itself, including the sharing of information resources by
educational institutions in Michigan, should occur by June 1, 1999.
Update 2000
Current Status: The leadership of MDE relating to Recommendation #7 is apparent in the
agency's funding of two statewide Technology Literacy Challenge Fund (TLCF) projects over a
two-year period: the "Michigan Teacher Network" and "Dialogue Web." TLCF investments
topped $1 million in that period. Both projects offer resources focusing on teachers and teaching
using technology including identifying "best practices" for educators. The "Michigan Teacher
Network" identifies digital content linked to the Michigan Curriculum Framework (MCF) for
teachers, allowing a search by keyword or MCF areas. Resources are selected by practicing school
media specialists from around the state.
39
All Update 2004 sections are DRAFT 060404 Version
Michigan’s State Technology Plan (1998)—Update 2004
Continued development of clearinghouse initiatives is being funded through Cycle 4 TLCF. This
will build on existing resources while expanding capabilities and resources as part of the Michigan
Technology Improvement Program (MTIP) through the Awareness and Dissemination
Clearinghouse.
MDE is working with the Michigan Virtual University and a task force of educational
organizations on a project to develop a portal for educators in the state that will provide a onestop, customizable interface to online educational resources for Michigan educators. While still in
the pre-planning phase, the portal would be a major step in achieving this recommendation.
Next Steps: One critical element for the integration of technology into curricular areas is the
expanded identification of high quality, teacher-tested digital content that fulfills specific curricula
standards and benchmarks. MDE needs to take a leadership role in facilitating a comprehensive
database of digital resources linked to specific learning objectives, enabling educators throughout
Michigan to select and evaluate technological resources against specific teaching and learning
needs. Several other states have models that bear review for the web-based resources for teachers
as well as professional development resources. Two examples are:

Georgia’s Learning Connections site at http://www.glc.k12.ga.us

Utah’s Educational Technology site at http://www.usoe.k12.ut.us/curr/edtech/
Citations:
Michigan Teacher Network
http://mtn.merit.edu
Dialogue Web
http://mssi.mde.state.mi.us
Michigan’s State Technology Planning Page
Michigan Department of Education
http://techplan.org
Michigan Electronic Library
http://mel.lib.mi.us/
Universal Service Fund Information Page
Merit Network, Inc.
http://www.merit.edu/k12.michigan/usf/
Update 2004 – Information Clearinghouse
Current Status:

The Center for Information Development (CID), which was the research portion of the
Michigan Technology Implementation Project, collected, analyzed, synthesized and
developed information related to integrating effective educational technologies. The Center
gathered information to identify promising practices and validated technology applications to
improve results for students. By establishing this central resource center that can provide
evaluation of promising practices, the State can help districts that do not have the resources to
collect and synthesize the abundance of information now available on best practices. The Web
site remains active and is an excellent source of curriculum integration ideas for educators.

The Michigan Teacher Network (MTN) continues to provide teachers with a wide variety of
resources to assist them with the integration of technology into their curriculum.
Next Steps: The following actions are recommended:

Update the existing Instructional Technology Across the Curriculum (ITAC) document and
align the document to the ISTE technology standards.

The Freedom To Learn Web site provides educators with a wide variety of Best Practices in
Using Technology resources.
40
All Update 2004 sections are DRAFT 060404 Version
Michigan’s State Technology Plan (1998)—Update 2004

MDE will promote Intel’s “Learning With Technology” Web site, which offers many ideas
for creating technology-rich projects and lesson plans in most curricular areas.

Establish a technology resource clearinghouse (print resources, available grants, consulting
services, FAQs, workshops) to assist LEAs with identifying and locating local, state, and
national resources.

Collaborate with the Library of Michigan to promote the use of the Michigan Electronic
Library system (MEL).
Citations:
Michigan Teacher Network
http://mtn.merit.edu
Dialogue Web
http://mssi.mde.state.mi.us
Michigan’s State Technology Planning Page
http://techplan.org
41
Michigan Electronic Library
http://mel.lib.mi.us/
Ohio Resource Center for Mathematics, Science and Reading
http://www.ohiorc.org
Intel’s Learning With Technology
http://www.intel.com/education/sections/section1/index.htm
All Update 2004 sections are DRAFT 060404 Version
Michigan’s State Technology Plan (1998)—Update 2004
Recommendation 8: Technology Staffing Levels
The Michigan Department of Education (MDE) should work in collaboration
with local and intermediate school districts (ISDs), regional educational media
centers (REMCs), professional educational organizations and accrediting
agencies to recommend voluntary professional and technical staffing
guidelines needed to maintain effective educational technology programs in
schools and school districts, and in regional K-12 service agencies such as
ISDs and REMCs.
Challenge: Technology support, especially basic assistance, is often overlooked by schools when
implementing a technology program. Practicing teachers rarely have time or the skills to perform
functions such as the installation, maintenance, and repair of classroom computers, video cameras,
or other electronic tools. Yet, according to ProjectEdTech, a survey of K-12 school buildings in
the state that was conducted in 1997 by Quality Education Data (QED) and the Michigan
Department of Education (MDE), more than a third of the public schools and nearly a half of the
nonpublic schools indicated that they rely on teachers to handle technical maintenance and support
functions.
Rationale and Implementation: The coordination of this recommendation is the responsibility of
MDE, with input from the State Superintendent’s Educational Technology Advisory Group
(ETAG). Educators must address technical support in school technology plans and in the
technology components of school improvement programs. Guidelines in determining appropriate
support levels are needed. California and Alabama now highlight the critical need for schools to
have specialized staff for technical support, maintenance, and repair.
Resources: Staff from MDE combined with input from interested educational institutions and
organizations are the primary resources needed to ensure that voluntary technology staffing
guidelines are identified for schools and school districts. The eventual dissemination of guidelines
can be achieved electronically at minimal cost.
Success: Technology staffing guidelines for schools should be identified by December 31, 1998,
then disseminated by MDE and affected educational organizations and institutions soon after. The
ultimate indicator of success for this recommendation is reflected in the number of schools and
school districts in Michigan that meet the voluntary technology staffing guidelines.
Update 2000
Current Status: In a survey of school superintendents by IDEA Consultants, Inc. for MDE in
1999, 81% indicated that their districts were not able to offer sufficient support for teachers. The
issue of support remains a critical area for schools, despite the fact that 58% of the superintendents
indicated their districts provided a “lot” of support. By contrast, less than 19% of 140 technology
coordinators informally surveyed by MDE in 1999 thought their districts provided a lot of support.
Through a statewide TLCF Cycle 3 grant—Michigan Technology Training Resources, a draft
document of the “Technology Staffing Guidelines” has been developed and is being tested by
several districts. Input was gathered from focus groups across the states as well as from
representatives of local and intermediate school districts (ISDs), regional media centers (REMCs),
and professional organizations serving on the steering committee. An online tool helps districts
assess their support capabilities.
Next Steps: To be a viable technology-planning tool, funding must continue to ensure that the
Staff Guidelines remains a dynamic and evolving instrument assisting districts as they annually to
review their technology plans. Distribution and inservice on using this planning tool for
42
All Update 2004 sections are DRAFT 060404 Version
Michigan’s State Technology Plan (1998)—Update 2004
appropriate staff in the field should be explored through the centers of the Michigan’s Technology
Improvement Project (MTIP).
Citations:
ProjectEdTech (1996-97): Michigan: State Tech Survey
Report. Quality Education Data and Michigan Department
of Education
http://www.mde.state.mi.us/tplan/qed.shtml
Michigan Technology Staffing Guidelines, Merit Network
http://techguide.merit.edu
Update 2004 – Technology Staffing Levels
Current Status:

The Michigan Technology Staffing Guidelines were developed to aid school districts in
analyzing their technology staffing needs, as mandated in the 1998 Michigan State
Technology Plan. These guidelines are designed to look at technical support in the context of
total technology planning that supports educational goals, standards-based curriculum, and
student outcomes. They consist of a set of tools districts can use to calculate staffing needs
and compare districts of similar size, report on staffing trends and responsibilities, and other
resources districts can use in the planning process for staffing. The original set of guidelines
are still available online at the Merit network Web site.
Next Steps: The following actions are recommended:

Advocate that districts take into consideration the wide variety of Total Cost of Ownership
(TCO) issues prior to the purchase of instructional technologies. The Consortium for School
Networking (CoSN) is a non-profit association that promotes the use of telecommunications
to improve K-12 learning. CoSN launched its "Taking TCO to the Classroom" project to
provide school leaders with tools to help them estimate the Total Cost of Ownership involved
when they build a network of computers and wire their classrooms to the Internet. The CoSN/
Gartner TCO Tool is a highly recommended tool that districts can use to assist them in
assessing the true cost of technology purchases.

Review and revise the existing Michigan Technology Staffing Guidelines.
Citations:
Michigan Technology Staffing Guidelines, Merit Network
http://techguide.merit.edu
43
CoSN / Gartner TCO Tool
http://classroomtco.cosn.org
All Update 2004 sections are DRAFT 060404 Version
Michigan’s State Technology Plan (1998)—Update 2004
Recommendation 9: Supplementary Technical Support
School districts should identify and utilize individuals in their local and school
communities who have expertise in the use of appropriate technologies and
the ability to work with teachers, staff, administrators, parents and students to
increase the efficiency and effectiveness with which technology is applied in
the learning environment.
Challenge: Many schools and some school districts cannot afford to have full- or part-time
persons on staff to assist teachers in integrating technology across the curriculum or to provide
them with the needed technical support. Even when staff resources are present, they may be
overwhelmed by immediate tasks and hard pressed to keep up with the introduction of new
technology and to assist in its appropriate use.
Rationale and Implementation: Local school districts, with assistance from their intermediate
school district (ISD) and/or regional educational media center (REMC), are positioned to establish
programs providing supplementary support for the integration of technology across the
curriculum, as well as in school administrative functions. A wide variety of human resources may
be available, including other staff and teachers, students, parents and community members. In
particular, students should not be overlooked. By high school, 71 percent of them are using
computers as an adjunct to learning, according to Computers and Classrooms, a 1997 Educational
Testing Service publication. Informal technology assistance from clerical and administrative staff,
or more formal mentorship programs with teachers helping other teachers can be considered.
Parental help and volunteers from the business community—for example, Tech Corps Michigan—
provide additional options. Online technical support available via the Internet can provide access
to human resources. The MDE can contribute by working with educational organizations to
identify model programs to serve as examples.
Resources: A program through which a school or school district can provide supplementary staff
support for technology may demand at least a temporary reassignment of staff time to help build
long-term support capacity.
Success: An initial, informal measurement of success for this recommendation would be the
interest expressed by schools and school districts in identifying models on which they could base
the creation of a technology support program of their own. A question related to the manner in,
and degree to which, schools utilize talent in their communities could be incorporated into an
annual survey of Michigan schools, as was conducted by Quality Education Data (QED) and MDE
in 1997.
Update 2000
Current Status: One program to expand school-community links was provided by MDE under
the aegis of the TLCF grants to implement Tech Corps Michigan. Tech Corps Michigan operates
under a charter with Tech Corps USA. The goal of Tech Corps Michigan is to assist schools in
finding and making good use of the volunteers from businesses, other public agencies, as well as
private individuals who have skills and knowledge which is of value to schools. Over a two-year
funding period, the Tech Corps in Michigan has established working models in 15 public school
districts across the state. Participants are being trained using the national Tech Corp model
adapted specifically for educational technology.
The "Michigan Technology Training Resource," funded in Cycles2-3 TLCF, included SupportNet
Online, an online resource focused on providing technical training and support to district
technology support staff and classroom teachers.
44
All Update 2004 sections are DRAFT 060404 Version
Michigan’s State Technology Plan (1998)—Update 2004
MDE’s Educator-on-Loan program is also designed to provide teacher-to-teacher support and
assist districts in increasing local capabilities. For the 1998-1999 school year the Educator OnLoan, Marilyn Western, traveled across the state working with district staff members on strategies
for integrating technology into the curriculum. The range of inservice ranged from the onecomputer classroom to lab settings. In the 1999-2000 school year, two Educators On-Loan, Jane
Frank and Jody Whitmer, expanded the direct support to teachers with the program continued by
Becky Skutt in 2000-2001.
In a review of a random sample of district technology plans submitted to MDE in 1997-1998, 53%
of 106 plans described collaborative activities with business, higher education, public libraries,
and/or community organizations, most often in the areas of professional development and
technology support.
Next Steps: Individual school districts should incorporate the community involvement piece as a
part of their district technology planning process.
Citations:
Tech Corps Michigan
http://www.wmich.edu/techcorps
MDE Educator on Loan
http://www.mde.state.mi.us/school/eol/index.shtml
Update 2004 – Supplementary Technical Support
Current Status:

The Regional Education Media Centers (REMCs) and Intermediate School Districts (ISDs)/
Regional Educational Service Agencies (RESAs) continue to play a significant role in the
supplementary technical support that is offered to the LEAs in Michigan.

A survey conducted by Jackson ISD (May 2004) reported that the 57 ISD/RESA
organizations in Michigan provide numerous technical support services to their local districts.
While not all ISD/RESAs offer every service, the range of support services offered to the
constituent local districts include, but are not limited to:

45
o
Internet services (73%)
o
Fiber optic or wide-area networks (65%)
o
Centralized telephone services (19%)
o
Digital/analog video transmissions (65%)
o
Centralized student management systems (44%)
o
Centralized financial management systems (43%)
o
Centralized human resource and payroll system (43%)
o
Online distance learning opportunities (51%)
o
Centralized substitute employee management systems (68%)
o
Technical management services (75%)
o
Data warehousing service for student assessment (36%)
The Freedom To Learn initiative included a “help desk” requirement in its RFP that the
selected vendor provide technical support relating to their product to all participating districts.
All Update 2004 sections are DRAFT 060404 Version
Michigan’s State Technology Plan (1998)—Update 2004

MDE staff administers and monitors the “tech listserv,” a forum for state technology
coordinators to communicate with each other on timely technology related instructional
issues.

Michigan Association for Computer Users in Learning (MACUL) continues with its
dedication to bring educators from all levels together to share their knowledge and concerns
regarding educational uses of computers and technology.

The 7th annual Educational Technology Coordinators Conference , sponsored by MACUL,
was hosted by Kalamazoo Community College.

MDE staff continues to present technology related videoconferences

o
Educational technology planning
o
E-Rate trainings
o
Michigan Electronic Grants System (MEGS) trainings
Techplan.org – offers a wide variety of technical resources to assist LEAs and ISD/RESA
reviewers in the development and evaluation of educational technology plans.
Next Steps: The following actions are recommended:

46
All Update 2004 sections are DRAFT 060404 Version
Michigan’s State Technology Plan (1998)—Update 2004
Recommendation 10: Infrastructure Support
The Michigan Department of Education (MDE) will work cooperatively with
state agencies, educational organizations and others to assist in the
establishment of a broad-based user group which will address issues related
to and formulate strategies to deal with:
1. coordination among local and regional initiatives to build statewide
networking capability;
2. equitable access to and affordable costs for high-quality
telecommunications services throughout Michigan;
3.
technical standards and network operating protocols;
4. support and technical assistance to ensure quality statewide network
operations; and
5. financial resources and purchasing programs to benefit educational
technology initiatives.
Challenge: For schools to utilize technology for educational programs beyond their own walls and
geographical boundaries and to access global information resources, they need the nation’s
Information Superhighway. This is an important concept in Michigan’s effort to ensure equitable
educational opportunity for all students. However, the ability of every school in the state to
establish a high-quality voice, video and data connection to every other school in Michigan does
not yet exist nor is there a timetable for its establishment and implementation. Individual schools
and school districts have limited ability to influence such a large-scale, statewide development.
Rationale and Implementation: The vision of Michigan having a voice, video and data network
accessible by all of the state’s educational institutions was promoted in Michigan’s State
Technology Plan (1992-1997), then reinforced in a plan by the Michigan Department of
Management and Budget (DMB) in 1995 to create the Michigan Information Network (MIN). The
primary impetus for the creation of this network must come from the Governor’s Office and the
Michigan Legislature. Other participants must be the Michigan Department of Education (MDE),
DMB and its Office of the MIN, the Michigan Jobs Commission, the Michigan Public Service
Commission, the Library of Michigan, and educational organizations representing user groups
from around the state. MiCTA (formerly the Michigan Collegiate Telecommunications
Association), the Merit Network and many large corporate technology users and providers of
telecommunication services could provide beneficial help. An initial step is to revisit the MIN plan
to identify what has and has not been accomplished, what may no longer be necessary, plus what
has transpired since 1995 that may affect the plan. Another step is to evaluate the impact of the
federal Universal Service Fund (USF) program on providing schools with more affordable
telecommunications services.
Resources: The primary resources needed to implement this recommendation are staff
commitments from MDE, other state agencies, and educational organizations with a stake in the
creation of a MIN.
Success: The establishment of a broad-based user group to facilitate the implementation of a MIN
should be in place no later than October 1, 1998. The user group should conduct a review of the
MIN plan by December 31, 1998, then turn its ongoing attention to assisting in the network’s
realization.
47
All Update 2004 sections are DRAFT 060404 Version
Michigan’s State Technology Plan (1998)—Update 2004
Update 2000
Current Status: Communication has been maintained between the MDE staff and Michigan
Information Network (MIN) staff to explore efforts to support districts in obtaining USF funding
to support infrastructure purchases. Applicants for the TLCF grants must leverage appropriate
purchases with USF discounts and through group pricing through the REMC and MiCTA
organizations. MDE supported MIN’s efforts to secure an adequate assessment of the statewide
telecommunications infrastructure in Michigan. This includes a statewide USF application for
2001 that will ease the burden on districts in applying for funds and a plan that will include
purchasing options that will promote standards and high quality communications infrastructure.
TLCF grants have been used to assist local districts in obtaining additional infrastructure. During
Cycle 2, 43.3% of districts included connectivity projects in funded programs, with 52.1% in
Cycle 3.
Next Steps: MDE will maintain communications with MIN to provide support aimed at increasing
the level of funds coming to Michigan through USF discounts for school districts and libraries.
MDE needs to develop an online means for submitting and validating technology plans that can
assist districts and schools in meeting the planning requirement for obtaining USF discounts.
Through the implementation of the Center for Educational Performance and Information (CEPI), a
data warehouse for the state’s schools, information on connectivity will be systematically
collected. This data should be analyzed to better understand the status of voice, video, and data
network capabilities and barriers.
Citations:
Michigan Information Network
http://www.min.state.mi.us/
Michigan Education Information System (MEIS)
http://www.mde.state.mi.us/off/dat/meiswarehouse.pdf
Merit Network, Inc.
http://www.merit.edu/
MiCTA
http://www.micta.org/
Update 2004 – Infrastructure Support
Current Status:

What is the current status of MIN?

Link Michigan Project?
Next Steps: The following actions are recommended:

48
JEANNENE HURLEY is researching….
All Update 2004 sections are DRAFT 060404 Version
Michigan’s State Technology Plan (1998)—Update 2004
Recommendation 11: Technical Standards
The Michigan Department of Education (MDE) will work cooperatively with
other state agencies and interested organizations to identify and disseminate
communications standards for voice, video and data networks, plus facilities
renovation and construction standards with optimal specifications for the
design of technology-rich learning environments.
Challenge: Network design involves a high degree of technical sophistication and expertise not
commonly found in schools and school districts since their primary purpose is the instruction of
students. Educators often lack necessary resources and expertise to design and create voice, video,
and data networks that will be compatible with statewide communications networks. In some
cases, the need for new technologies to be interoperable with existing school systems is
overlooked. Also, the school buildings are, in many cases, more than 40 years old and were not
designed for modern technology. School administrators and technology coordinators need reliable
information about networking architectures, electrical service demands, cable pathways and
equipment closets and the provision of assistive technology. Too often, educators rely solely on
the vendor for technical advice and support.
Rationale and Implementation: This recommendation requires a collaborative effort between
MDE, the state’s Office of the Michigan Information Network (MIN), telecommunication services
providers, existing networking entities such as the Merit Network and MiCTA (formerly the
Michigan Collegiate Telecommunications Association), architectural firms and educational
technology consultants, plus interested educational organizations. A special task force under the
auspices of the broad-based user group identified in Recommendation 10 should be charged with
the responsibility of identifying and disseminating standards and resources related to the
construction and renovation of school facilities and the design of networking infrastructures. An
initial effort at identifying standards to which schools could refer was included in the Final Report
of the MIN Planning Committee, submitted to the Michigan Department of Management and
Budget (DMB) in 1995.
Resources: Primary resources needed to implement this recommendation are staff commitments
from affected state agencies such as MDE, the Michigan Department of Management and Budget
(DMB) and its Office of the MIN, plus interested educational organizations, businesses,
telecommunication services providers and other parties. Primary dissemination of eventual
standards and guidelines can be accomplished via MDE’s web pages (MDEnet), with
supplementary distribution in hard copy format.
Success: A set of construction and renovation standards, accompanied by recommended network
infrastructure guidelines, should be completed and disseminated by December 31, 1998.
Update 2000
Current Status: While no specific projects are currently focused on creating a uniform standard
for technology, MDE has worked with other agencies including MIN, MICTA and Merit Network,
Inc. on projects that will assist districts in understanding and implementing standards based
communications networks. Through a statewide application under USF, MIN and MICTA are
developing a process that will further assist districts in improving their infrastructure using high
quality, standardized options.
Next Steps: This topic should be considered by the MTIP steering committee in determining
priority-funding activities. MDE should continue work with MIN, and assist in dissemination of
information on infrastructure opportunities.
49
All Update 2004 sections are DRAFT 060404 Version
Michigan’s State Technology Plan (1998)—Update 2004
Update 2004 – Technical Standards
Current Status:
As stated in Update 2000, no specific projects are currently focused on creating a uniform standard
for technology. MDE continues to work with other on projects that will assist districts in
understanding and implementing standards-based communications networks.
Next Steps: The following actions are recommended:

50
Evaluate the need to publish a list of technical recommendations.
All Update 2004 sections are DRAFT 060404 Version
Michigan’s State Technology Plan (1998)—Update 2004
Recommendation 12: Model Technology Plan
The Michigan Department of Education (MDE) will establish a model
technology plan or identify an existing model plan, including elements
necessary for an effective planning process and ease of incorporation into
school improvement plans, to serve as a guide and to accelerate the
preparation of quality planning documents by local school districts.
Challenge: The importance of schools planning effectively for technology programs has been
apparent for many years, but only in 1997 did this activity became a practical mandate. The
federal Universal Service Fund (USF) program requires that school districts have state-approved
technology plans to be eligible to receive discounts of 20 to 90 percent on many telecommunications services, including Internet access and internal wiring. Many districts have been forced to
hastily develop technology plans. They may have to upgrade existing plans and seek state
approval to continue participation in the USF program. School districts often lack the onsite
expertise to guide them in such a thorough planning exercise.
Rationale and Implementation: If school districts in Michigan fail to adopt quality technology
plans, key funding initiatives such as the USF program could be jeopardized. A model plan
prepared or identified, then disseminated by educational interests such as intermediate school
districts (ISDs), regional educational media centers (REMCs), colleges and universities, and MDE
would serve as a starting point and guideline for school districts needing assistance. The model
plan should address issues such as integrating technology into the curriculum, prioritizing and
establishing timelines for technology acquisition, funding technology programs and evaluating the
impact of technology investments. Districts using the model plan should tailor it to meet local
circumstances and integrate it into the technology component of school and school district
improvement plans. A sample technology plan created by the Gratiot-Isabella Regional
Educational Service District in 1997 may serve as the basis for a model. In addition, model
assistive technology plans have been developed by Wayne County RESA and Oakland Schools.
Resources: The Michigan Department of Education may award a small amount from the agency’s
1998 allocation in the Technology Literacy Challenge Fund program to implement this
recommendation. If the Gratiot-Isabella RESD plan or another existing model can be utilized, the
cost to implement this recommendation would be minimized. The expense of disseminating a
model plan would be modest if it is distributed electronically.
Success: At least 95 percent of the local school districts, public school academies and nonpublic
schools should have quality technology plans in place by December 31, 1998.
Update 2000
Current Status: Approximately 80% of the school districts in Michigan have technology plans in
place. Although all plans have the elements needed to be eligible for USF discounts, the quality
varies.
Through a statewide TLCF funding project—"Implementing Technology in an Educational
Context," a white paper on assessing the technology planning process was developed for school
administrators and school boards, as well as an online district technology plan assessment
instrument. Additional resources on improving planning from this project are available for districts
on the project's web site.
MDE is partnered with Gratiot-Isabella RESD under a Cycle 4 TLCF grant in deploying an online
technology plan development process to serve as a guide to districts as they work on developing
new plans and/or revising current plans, many of which expire in the year 2000. This site includes
51
All Update 2004 sections are DRAFT 060404 Version
Michigan’s State Technology Plan (1998)—Update 2004
a model plan based on an earlier one developed by Gratiot-Isabella and used by many districts in
their initial technology planning in 1997-1998. This model plan will be improved through research
being conducted jointly by MDE and Eastern Michigan University on technology planning in
Michigan school districts. Training for plan reviewers is included in the project.
Next Steps: MDE in cooperation with MIN should develop a process to ensure district technology
plans are updated on a yearly basis with comprehensive revisions every three to five years. Work
should continue towards creating a process that will combine technology planning with other
school plans including School Improvement Plans to help schools focus on unified reform efforts.
Additional professional development is needed to assist schools and districts in improving and
assessing their planning processes. This is an area which should be addressed through the
Michigan Technology Improvement Program centers.
Citations:
MDE K-12 Technology Planning Web Site (2000)
Gratiot-Isabella RESD
http://techplan.org
USF Technology Plan Information for Michigan K-12
Schools, Merit Network, Inc.
http://www.merit.edu/k12.michigan/usf/action/k12.html
Beyond the Technology Plan
http://www.tricoassociates.com/techlit/EffectiveInvestment.html
Technology Plan Assessment Instrument, Michigan
TechCorps
http://www.edzone.net/tech_plan/
Technology Planning for Michigan School Districts
http://www.trico-associates.com/techlit/plan.html
Update 2004 – Model Technology Plan
Current Status:

MDE staff continues to update the educational technology planning Web site on a regular
basis.
Next Steps: The following actions are recommended:

The model technology plan that is currently posted at http://techplan.org, will be revised
to reflect the recently modified checklist of components that are required for state
approval.
Citations:
MDE Educational Technology Planning site
http://techplan.org
National Educational Technology Plan
http://www.nationaledtechplan.org
52
NEIR-TEC Technology Briefs for NCLB Planners
http://www.neirtec.org/products/techbriefs/default.asp
National Center for Technology Planning
http://www.nctp.com
USAC e-Rate Technology Planning page
http://www.sl.universalservice.org/apply/step2.asp#appa
All Update 2004 sections are DRAFT 060404 Version
Michigan’s State Technology Plan (1998)—Update 2004
Recommendation 13: Technology Appropriation
The Michigan Legislature should provide an annual appropriation of funds in
the state’s School Aid Act specifically for the purpose of implementing
technology-assisted learning programs, with districts that receive funds being
subject to three basic stipulations. Districts must: 1) have a technology plan
that is in compliance with state and federal requirements; 2) supply a
matching dollar value from local resources; and 3) demonstrate that real
savings gained from participation in the federal Universal Service Fund (USF)
program have been reinvested in additional technology, technology upgrades
or training, or related expenditures.
Challenge: The demand on existing foundation allowances for many school districts under
Michigan’s School Aid Act far exceeds the dollars available. Finding funds to improve and
implement technology strategies for enhancing student achievement and district productivity is a
difficult task. Greater support from the state would help schools invest in the technical and human
infrastructures that increase technological capacity and greater statewide equity of access to
technology-assisted learning resources.
Rationale and Implementation: The Governor’s Office and the Michigan Legislature must work
jointly to establish an annual appropriation under the state’s School Aid Act to fund technologyrelated expenses. This appropriation must take into account the effect of the Durant settlement on
educational technology funding. Without such an appropriation in the School Aid Act, the
implementation of local technology programs is likely to continue to be fragmented and
concentrated in districts with greater local resources. Funding sources other than local budgets are
often restricted to infrastructure, or can require extensive staff input to prepare grant
applications—human resources that many districts may not possess. An annual appropriation for
educational technology in the School Aid Act will establish a recurring source of dollars on which
school districts can rely. School districts must also identify resources on the local level that can be
used as a match for state dollars, as well as demonstrate that they are using savings gained from
the USF program. School districts also must have a technology plan to assure that all funds for
educational technology—from state, local or private sources—are spent wisely and have a positive
effect on student learning.
Resources: Educational interests in Michigan must commit the staff resources necessary to gain
legislative support for an annual allocation for educational technology in the School Aid Act. A
specific technology-focused expenditure proposal must be developed. Schools must identify
sources of matching funds.
Success: Obtaining approval to include an annual appropriation of funds for educational
technology in the state’s School Aid Act should be accomplished by the close of the current
legislative session, December 31, 1998. An actual appropriation of dollars would occur during the
subsequent legislative session, to be available during the 1999-2000 school year.
Update 2000
Current Status: In a survey conducted by the Milken Exchange for Educational Technology for
Education Week in 1998, Michigan was shown to be one of six states that did not provide direct
funding to school districts for technology. A major step forward in supporting technology at a
state-wide level is the one-year program to provide laptop computers for all teachers, the
Governor's Teacher Technology Initiative (TTI). Further work remains to be done to address the
issue of ongoing funding required for systematic change.
53
All Update 2004 sections are DRAFT 060404 Version
Michigan’s State Technology Plan (1998)—Update 2004
Next Steps: The MDE should take the leadership role in facilitating a task force composed of
representatives of school districts, professional educational organizations, businesses, universities,
and other stakeholder groups to inform the legislature and public of the need to fund educational
technology throughout the state.
This effort should be considered as a component of the State Board of Education policy
development in the technology area.
Citation:
Universal Service Fund Information Page
Merit Network, Inc.
http://www.merit.edu/k12.michigan/usf/
Governor's Teacher Technology Initiative
Michigan Virtual University
http://www.mivu.org
Update 2004 –Technology Appropriation
Current Status:

Freedom To Learn: In August 2003, Michigan Governor Jennifer Granholm signed the
state’s education bill (Public Act 158 of 2003) approving $39 million to provide wireless
technology to middle school students, especially the sixth grade. The program will
provide school districts with a totally integrated education solutions package that includes
wireless computing devices, technical support, software, professional development,
course content, and assessments. This allocation expands the pilot program, formerly
known as Learning Without Limits. Originated by Michigan Speaker of the House Rick
Johnson (R), the pilot program was funded with about $9.5 million approved by the
Michigan Legislature for the 2002-03 school year. Freedom to Learn is jointly
administered by the Michigan Department of Education and Michigan Virtual University
with the assistance of a 32-member statewide advisory group from government,
education, business, and industry.
Next Steps: The following actions are recommended:

54
Explore the possibility of establishing a per pupil allocation for educational technology
expenditures outside of the basic foundation allocation.
All Update 2004 sections are DRAFT 060404 Version
Michigan’s State Technology Plan (1998)—Update 2004
Recommendation 14: Funding Flexibility
Educational interests should work with state and local policymakers to
propose and seek approval of legislation that would amend the state’s School
Code to allow for more flexibility in spending building and site sinking funds,
as well as bond funds, for technology-related expenditures.
Challenge: The existing School Code in Michigan does not permit the expenditure of building
and site sinking funds for acquiring equipment such as computers and peripheral devices. It does
allow for the construction of networks with respect to cabling. Therefore, school districts may wire
buildings for network operations, but have no means of activating the network because funding for
termination equipment is not available. Bond funds may be used by schools for initial purchases,
including customized application software, but software upgrades are not acceptable expenditures.
The current School Code also prohibits the use of bond proceeds to lease telecommunications
services. Such a restriction may prevent the most effective use of limited resources. The potential
for technology to benefit education will not be fully realized as long as school districts’ ability to
finance these advanced products and services is limited.
Rationale and Implementation: School districts, their representative organizations, and
interested parties must work with state policymakers to develop and approve legislation to amend
the state’s School Code. Amending the School Code as recommended—possibly including a
provision requiring that school districts have technology plans in compliance with state and
federal requirements—would provide another option for schools to fund hardware, software and,
in some cases, access fees needed to operate voice, video and data networks. Currently, the
acquisition of end-user equipment must come from each district’s general fund or from special
resources such as grants, bond funds and fundraisers. Since many districts are already severely
taxed for day-to-day operations, significant dollars for the acquisition of computers and peripheral
devices may not be available. General fund budgets are strained by secondary costs related to
technology acquisition, such as maintenance, software, and training expenses.
Resources: Commitments are necessary from school districts and interested educational
organizations and agencies to develop and advocate on behalf of amending the School Code as
proposed.
Success: Legislative approval should be obtained by September 1, 1998, for amendments to the
Revised School Code, Public Act No. 291 of 1995. An amendment to Section 380.1212 should
include enabling language to expand the scope of the law to include the use of sinking funds for
technology equipment. An amendment to Section 380.1351a should allow the use of bond funds
for long-term leases for telecommunications services and the acquisition of application software.
Update 2000
Current Status: Progress on this recommendation did not occur as expected. There was no
change in the School Code.
Next Steps: With the new legislature now in place, the need for apprising state policymakers of
the continuing need for legislative amendments to facilitate funding options for school districts to
keep up-to-date technology systems in place is imperative. ETAG recommends that MDE form a
task force comprised of representatives from ISDs, local school districts, and professional
organizations for the purpose of devising and implementing a plan of action for legislators. This
plan of action would address the need to amend the school code in this area. The task force would
work during the 2000-2001 school year to affect change in the status quo by June 2001.
55
All Update 2004 sections are DRAFT 060404 Version
Michigan’s State Technology Plan (1998)—Update 2004
Update 2004 – Funding Flexibility
Current Status:
o
LEAs are required to provide the following information prior to receiving “state
approval” of their local education technology plan.
o
A financial plan for long-term investment and sustainability, including
coordination and leveraging through local, state, and federal programs and/or
grants, has been developed. (Sources of alternative funding resources are
identified here.)
Next Steps: The following actions are recommended:
56
All Update 2004 sections are DRAFT 060404 Version
Michigan’s State Technology Plan (1998)—Update 2004
Recommendation 15: Collaboration
Educational institutions should make every effort to maximize the funding
support and assistance available from public and private sources by
establishing collaborative arrangements with other schools, school districts,
colleges, universities, libraries and similar entities to aggregate demand for
technology products and services, and where real savings result from
participation in initiatives such as the Universal Service Fund (USF) program,
these dollars should be designated for additional technology-related
investments.
Challenge: Public and private funding initiatives to assist schools with the acquisition of
technology for classroom and administrative uses are placing a greater premium on collaborative
endeavors that maximize the positive impact and value of investment for each project. Since 1994,
with the dedication by the Michigan Public Service Commission of excess earnings of Ameritech
to support educational technology, schools have been increasingly conscious of the need to work
with others, including libraries, health care facilities, nonprofit organizations, and private
businesses. However, this need to collaborate has not yet been fully realized by all educational
institutions. Such partnerships benefit all participants.
Rationale and Implementation: Schools realize with increasing frequency that their demand for
technology and telecommunications services—such as Internet access, bandwidth for interactive
video programming and even basic telephone service—is similar to the needs of colleges,
universities, libraries, health care facilities, nonprofit organizations, private businesses, and
governmental agencies. Collaborative purchasing and leasing agreements drive down prices.
Fiscal efficiencies can be achieved by school districts if they reinvest savings from the federal
USF discount program to help extend existing funding for technology. Those savings can be
applied to activities such as staff training which may not be eligible for support under other
funding programs. Basic strategies and decisions regarding technology funding and support rest
with local administrators and governing boards. However, the Michigan Department of Education
(MDE) with input from the general education community should place emphasis on the need for
collaboration—and even the reinvestment of USF savings—in guidelines that the agency prepares
for the Technology Literacy Challenge Fund program and other grant projects. MDE should
utilize the expertise of the State Superintendent’s Educational Technology Advisory Group
(ETAG) in developing criteria and an increased focus for the administration of the Technology
Literacy Challenge Fund program in 1998.
Resources: Leadership and a staff commitment by schools and school districts, and by their
potential partners in collaborative projects, are necessary. A commitment of staff is also essential
by MDE.
Success: One measure of success is an informal evaluation of the quality of grant applications
received by MDE that feature strong partnerships between schools and other entities. In addition,
the number of Michigan schools and school districts participating in the USF program should
reach 90 percent by December 31, 1998. The reinvestment of USF savings by educational
institutions will be more difficult to measure, but could be subject to an independent federal
review.
Update 2000
Current Status: To date, there has been no systematic assessment of partnership activities.
However, many of the TLCF grants include partnerships with universities, community colleges,
ISDs, and businesses. An initial measurement of accomplishment features an increase in the
57
All Update 2004 sections are DRAFT 060404 Version
Michigan’s State Technology Plan (1998)—Update 2004
number of school partnerships involving business, community colleges, universities and
community organizations. There is some evidence to support this from the number of Cycle TLCF
3 grants supporting partnerships, notably seven of the eight statewide projects, all of the five
online projects and several of the regional projects. There are some local projects involved in
partnerships but no specific data are available at this time.
In a review of a random sample of district technology plans submitted to MDE in 1997-1998, 53%
of 106 plans described collaborative activities with business, higher education, public libraries,
and/or community organizations, most often in the areas of professional development and
technology support.
One program to expand school-community links was provided by MDE under the aegis of the
TLCF grants to implement Tech Corps Michigan. Tech Corps Michigan operates under a charter
with Tech Corps USA. The goal of Tech Corps Michigan is to assist schools in finding and
making good use of the volunteers from businesses, other public agencies, as well as private
individuals who have skills and knowledge which is of value to schools. Over a two-year funding
period, the Tech Corps in Michigan has established working models in 15 public school districts
across the state. Participants are being trained using the national Tech Corp model adapted
specifically for educational technology.
The REMC Statewide Cooperative Acquisitions Project is a continuing activity of the REMC
Association of Michigan. The project provides volume bid prices to schools through their local
REMC (with some services also available to libraries, community colleges and universities that
participate or coordinate with their REMC).
Next Steps: With the advent of the Michigan Technology Improvement Program centers, which
brings together a large partnership of educational agencies, universities, and other non-profits,
MDE should encourage new linkages that can assist in partnership development. The MTIP
centers are being developed as part of a statewide coalition for educational organizations, which
provides a core for such collaboration, and the potential to build additional partnership initiatives
with business and other non-profits related to specific initiatives. MDE, in its leadership role for
MTIP, should leverage MTIP to build new collaborations.
MDE should continue to play a supportive role in encouraging districts to take advantage of the
USF discounts as well as REMC and MiCTA pricing. In addition, suggestions for developing
collaboration with local community businesses should be incorporated into the technology
planning guidelines as mentioned in Recommendation 12.
Citations:
REMC Association of Michigan Cooperative Purchasing
Program
http://isd.ingham.k12.mi.us/~remcam/
Universal Service Fund Information Page, Merit Network
http://www.merit.edu/k12.michigan/usf/
MICTA
http://www.micta.org/
TechCorps Michigan
http://www.wmich.edu/techcorps
Update 2004 - Collaboration
Current Status:
LEAs are required to provide the following information prior to receiving “state approval” of their
local educational technology plan. Districts often describe the partnerships that exist with
community organizations and regional businesses as well as the larger, nationally recognized
corporations within this section.
o
58
Strategies and supporting resources such as services, software, other electronically
delivered learning materials, and print resources that will be acquired to ensure successful
and effective uses of technology.
All Update 2004 sections are DRAFT 060404 Version
Michigan’s State Technology Plan (1998)—Update 2004
Examples of existing corporate partnerships and collaborations that continue to thrive in Michigan
include:
o Hewlett-Packard (Freedom To Learn)
o Intel (Teach To the Future)
o Microsoft (professional development)
Next Steps: The following actions are recommended:
MDE should continue to play a supportive role in encouraging districts to take advantage of the
USF discounts as well as REMC and MiCTA pricing as previously described in Update 2000.
59
All Update 2004 sections are DRAFT 060404 Version
Michigan’s State Technology Plan (1998)—Update 2004
Recommendation 16: Statewide Purchasing and Licensing
The Michigan Department of Education (MDE) should work in conjunction with
intermediate school districts (ISDs), regional educational media centers
(REMCs) and other educational organizations to support and expand existing
statewide purchasing, licensing and evaluation programs for items such as
full-text online data bases, educational software and instructional video
programs, and to identify similar resources in the state’s library community
that may be available to schools at little or no charge.
Challenge: Inequities in educational opportunity are created when some schools cannot afford
licensing fees required for software programs, video titles and online access to electronic resources
that provide teachers with instructional tools and students with information necessary for the
completion of class projects and assignments. Even those educational institutions budgeting for
such expenses find their dollars do not extend nearly as far as those for schools and school districts
working cooperatively. Further, educators sometimes have difficulty finding unbiased evaluations
of electronic resources to help when making acquisition decisions.
Rationale and Implementation: The Michigan Department of Education (MDE), with
participation from ISDs, REMCs and other educational groups, should review existing statewide
purchasing, licensing and evaluation programs to determine how they could be supplemented or
improved. One model of aggregated purchasing for software and related products has been opeRated by the REMC Association of Michigan since 1972. In 1996, it saved schools and local and
intermediate school districts an estimated $16 million. Other models include MiCTA (formerly the
Michigan Collegiate Telecommunications Association), plus the “state contract” administered by
the Michigan Department of Management and Budget. AccessMichigan is a $2 million project
funded by the Library of Michigan and the Michigan Legislature to make online periodical
databases accessible in all libraries and schools in the state. MDE should establish a partnership
with the Library of Michigan and designate a liaison to meet regularly with representatives of the
library community to keep abreast of resources that may benefit schools, with comparable
collaborations encouraged at the regional and local levels.
Resources: Modest staff resources are required by MDE and existing cooperative licensing and
purchasing programs to review existing programs and their capabilities, but much more significant
is the actual earmarking of funds to purchase or license access to various resources on behalf of all
schools in Michigan. Precedent for such an investment was established by the Legislature with its
appropriation of $500,000 to help launch AccessMichigan. Additionally, MDE may dedicate a
significant dollar amount from the state’s 1998 allocation of federal money under the Technology
Literacy Challenge Fund for applications providing statewide access to electronic learning
resources.
Success: Partial success for this recommendation is determined by the creation of a cooperative
effort among MDE and existing purchasing and licensing programs in Michigan to support and
expand services to schools and school districts. However, the ability to maximize the success of
this proposal will be measured by an infusion of funds that will not only increase services to
educational institutions in Michigan, but provide greater and more equitable statewide distribution
of electronic learning resources.
Update 2000
Current Status: Progress toward MDE working in conjunction with ISDs, REMCs and other
educational organizations has occurred on several fronts. Technology Literacy Challenge Fund
allocations for 1998-99 included support for:
60
All Update 2004 sections are DRAFT 060404 Version
Michigan’s State Technology Plan (1998)—Update 2004
(1) the REMC Statewide Cooperative Acquisitions Project. This project also continues to
coordinate districts access to the State of Michigan Extended Purchasing Program. The
project provides volume bid prices to schools through their local REMC (with some
services also available to libraries, community colleges and universities that participate or
coordinate with their REMC). Project bid programs include: Online Information
Resources, AV Supplies and Equipment, Computer Supplies and Accessories,
Instructional, Application and Network Software, Library Supplies (Coordinated with
MLC), Coordinate access to the State of Michigan Extended Purchasing Program.
Savings for five years from this cooperative effort exceed $78 million dollars.
(2) a statewide initiative for the AccessMichigan program enabling procurement of a
license for an on-line database specifically designed for students in grades K-6. To date
AccessMichigan reports 279 schools and/or school districts are registered to use the
InfoTrac databases with approximately 328 different schools accessing the full-text type
periodical databases per month.
(3) 73 local districts and 10 regional projects that, in many cases, will enable the
expansion of the capabilities for on-line access from individual schools and classrooms
within local school districts. This support will serve to make on-line resources available
to a greater number of students, staff and parents.
MDE has also instituted a collaborative component with Statewide TLCF projects so efforts are
coordinated to provide more equitable statewide distribution of electronic learning resources.
Next Steps: MDE will continue to foster/facilitate the existing successful REMCs purchasing
systems (including identifying hardware, software or other technology systems that are not yet
available through statewide or REMC purchasing programs) and collaboration to ensure that
future TLCF resources are directed to initiatives that support equitable access to statewide
resources at little or no charge. It is incumbent upon individual school districts to take advantage
of the savings offered by participating in these initiatives.
Citations:
REMC Association of Michigan Cooperative Purchasing
Program
http://isd.ingham.k12.mi.us/~remcam/
MiCTA
http://www.micta.org/
AccessMichigan
http://accessmichigan.lib.mi.us/
Update 2004 – Statewide Purchasing and Licensing
Current Status:
61

MDE collaborates with the Regional Education Media Center Association of Michigan
(REMCAM). REMCAM’s “Co-operative Purchasing” program provides effective cost
savings through statewide cooperative purchasing that allows local resources to be
reallocated to enhance teaching and learning.

MDE collaborates with MiCTA. The purpose of MiCTA is to identify and resolve
common voice, data, and video issues and problems; to provide a clearinghouse of
information relative to these technologies; to gain information on new products and
services; to improve the level of competency and enhance the professional status of the
member administrators; to influence the development of voice, data, and video services to
members at reduced costs and improved quality; to participate in governmental and
regulatory proceedings affecting technology issues.
All Update 2004 sections are DRAFT 060404 Version
Michigan’s State Technology Plan (1998)—Update 2004
Next Steps: The following actions are recommended:

Continue support for REMC statewide co-operative purchasing program.

Continue the collaboration with and the support of MiCTA to minimize
telecommunication costs for local districts.
Citations:
REMC Association of Michigan Cooperative Purchasing
Program
http://remc13.org/coop/index.html
MiCTA
http://www.micta.org
62
AccessMichigan
http://accessmichigan.lib.mi.us/
REMC Association of Michigan
http://remc.org
All Update 2004 sections are DRAFT 060404 Version
Michigan’s State Technology Plan (1998)—Update 2004
Recommendation 17: Advocacy
The Michigan Department of Education (MDE) must step forward to
collaborate with—and when necessary marshal and aggregate the energies
and resources of—other state agencies, state policymakers, educational
organizations and institutions, libraries and businesses to increase public
awareness and promote the appropriate use of technology in the learning
community.
Challenge: Segments of the general public, including some governmental and educational
policymakers, possess limited understanding of the far-reaching evolution in informational
technologies and the application of these new technologies to education. Lack of awareness and a
fear of the unknown present obstacles to the introduction of technology that can benefit student
learning. While many groups and organizations in Michigan, as well as a number of government
agencies, have been supportive of incorporating technology into the educational mission, the state
has lacked strong champions who are both tireless and vocal in their advocacy.
Rationale and Implementation: Statewide advocates for educational technology can come from
within government—the Governor, the Michigan Legislature or a state agency such as MDE—or
from one of Michigan’s leading educational organizations, or from a combination of sources
including the business community. Advocacy and leadership are best when there are multiple
entities serving as champions. Efforts should be nonpartisan.
Resources: Time and travel demands on the leading advocates for educational technology will be
significant. Staff resources of MDE and other state agencies are needed in supporting roles. The
State Superintendent’s Educational Technology Advisory Group (ETAG), featuring
representatives of approximately 40 educational organizations in the state, can be a significant
force in an advocacy role.
Success: The impact of this recommendation can be measured in two steps: 1) there is a strategic
and mutually beneficial alliance formed between MDE and other educational technology stakeholders, with strong advocates emerging from this process; and 2) an action plan is developed to
increase the knowledge level and understanding of policymakers and the general public related to
the use of technology in the field of education. In addition, the successful implementation of other
recommendations in MDE’s State Technology Plan will, in part, be a measure of the positive
impact of this recommendation.
Update 2000
Current Status: No specific programs have been implemented to develop advocacy leaders.
MDE’s Educator-on-Loan program has provided skilled educators who have spoken to Chambers
of Commerce and other organizations to help business and community leaders better understand
educational technology issues.
Next Steps: Michigan’s Technology Improvement Program (MTIP) was developed to provide a
leadership and support that will enable Michigan’s schools to improve student learning. This plan
will establish a set of interrelated services that are designed to assist local efforts while providing
greater coordination between state and regional activities that promote efficiency through
collaboration and partnerships. Advocacy is one of the charges for this program.
63
All Update 2004 sections are DRAFT 060404 Version
Michigan’s State Technology Plan (1998)—Update 2004
Update 2004 – Advocacy
Current Status:
Michigan’s Technology Improvement Program (MTIP) of 2002 identified a cadre of 50
“technology scholars” from all geographic areas within Michigan. The MTIP scholars assisted
each of the Center's ten regions with delivering regional professional development and providing
technology integration support for the regions. Although funding for the MTIP project has
expired, the MTIP scholars and other regional representatives continue to be strong technology
advocates and resources for technology integration and technical support.
MDE’s Office of School Improvement continues to work with districts to ensure they have a
comprehensive school improvement plan that includes the use of technology and learning, and that
the plan includes appropriate technology integration professional development for staff. The
current focus is on those schools that have been identified for improvement, corrective action or
restructuring to help those districts strengthen their school improvement plans and related
activities.
Next Steps: The following actions are recommended:
64
All Update 2004 sections are DRAFT 060404 Version
Michigan’s State Technology Plan (1998)—Update 2004
Recommendation 18: Public Awareness
Schools must expand support for technology-rich learning environments by
creating opportunities that promote awareness of, and increase knowledge
about, educational technologies currently being used or to be used by
students within their communities.
Challenge: A lack of knowledge and awareness regarding the potential for technology to benefit
student learning and achievement contributes to occasional resistance by parents, businesses,
community leaders and even school board members to the funding, implementation and expansion
of school instructional technology programs.
Rationale and Implementation: School technology programs require widespread understanding
and support within a community. The purchase and operation of computers, video cameras and
monitors, VCRs and other electronic learning tools and associated software, plus the establishment
of local and wide area networks and telecommunications links to distant learning resources,
demand substantial investment. Educators should be sure community members have a basic
understanding of the positive value of technology to education. Schools can work independently
or in conjunction with intermediate school districts (ISDs) and regional educational media centers
(REMCs) to stage awareness campaigns and host related activities. Methods of showcasing the
value of technology in the learning environment include technology fairs, vendor demonstrations,
plus classroom visits by parents, community members, and business leaders. Illustrating the use of
technology by local businesses will contribute to understanding the significance of technologyassisted learning to student achievement.
Resources: Additional dollars are not required to implement this recommendation, but a periodic
commitment of staff time to organize and conduct technology awareness activities is necessary for
schools. The Michigan Department of Education (MDE) and leading educational organizations in
the state can help local educators by identifying model awareness programs. Dissemination of
information could occur electronically, as well as during annual meetings and conferences of
organizations such as the Michigan Association for Computer-Related Technology Users in
Learning (MACUL), the Michigan Association for Media in Education (MAME) and the
Michigan Institute for Educational Management (MIEM).
Success: An initial measurement of success for this recommendation is the amount of interest
expressed by schools and school districts in identifying models on which technology awareness
programs can be based, with a data base of such models organized by MDE. An indirect
measurement is the support given by voters to local funding initiatives that involve a technology
component.
Update 2000
Current Status: Increased public awareness and support for technology in schools is a critical
need. As expenditures for the deployment of technology in schools increase there is more focus on
the benefits of these expenditures for improving student learning. There are many "success stories"
of the use of information technology throughout Michigan but often these stories are not visible
beyond the particular classroom where they occur. According the 1998-1999 QED survey, 23.1%
of districts were using technology extensively to enhance communications between administrators,
teachers, students, and parents. In a 1999 survey of superintendents, 94% indicated that their
districts had web pages accessible by the public. The "Michigan Teacher Network," a statewide
TLCF project, has developed resources for parents as a way to help them better understand the
technology environment for learning. The "Improving Technology in an Educational Context"
65
All Update 2004 sections are DRAFT 060404 Version
Michigan’s State Technology Plan (1998)—Update 2004
project has components aimed at educating school boards on technology policy issues. "Academy
for 21st Century Schools" included a component to assist schools in outreach to parents.
Next Steps: Efforts to share success stories at the district and state level need to be intensified.
The successes resulting from the Technology Literacy Challenge Fund and the Governor’s Next
Day Teacher Grants provide a good basis for dissemination of information about the benefits of
information technology for the young people in our schools. The Department of Education should
help to coordinate efforts to disseminate such information in our State. The Michigan Technology
Improvement Program centers should be included in these efforts. MDE should be encouraged to
use its web site and other resources to highlight educational success stories and high quality
projects across the state.
Citations:
Michigan Association for Computer-related technology
Users in Learning (MACUL)
http://www.macul.org
Michigan Association for Media in Education (MAME)
http://www.mame.gen.mi.us/
Michigan Teacher Network
http://mtn.merit.edu
Michigan Institute for Educational Management (MIEM)
http://www.melg.org/miem/index.html
Update 2004 – Public Awareness
Current Status:


The Michigan Department of Education’s website offers a wide array on information
including:
o
State Board of Education - information updates, minutes, resolutions, and
reports.
o
Curriculum - K-12 content standards, benchmarks, and curriculum links.
o
Program and Office - descriptions of the various programs and offices at MDE.
o
Parents and Family - numerous resources of interest to the community.
o
Educators - teacher resources.
o
Administrators - administrator resources.
o
Grants: - how to apply, what’s available, MEIS, MEGS
o
School Assessment and Accountability - central source of information on four
major areas that impact student performance and school accountability.
Updates on the Freedom To Learn initiative are available and updated regularly at the
FTL website.
Next Steps: The following actions are recommended:

66
Implement a statewide campaign to increase awareness of all available MDE, Michigan
Department of Labor & Economic Growth – Office of Career & Technical Preparation
(MDLEG-OCTP), and other state government departments’ resources.
All Update 2004 sections are DRAFT 060404 Version
Michigan’s State Technology Plan (1998)—Update 2004
Recommendation 19: Administrative Communications
Schools, school districts, the Michigan Department of Education (MDE) and
other educational institutions should use technology to enhance
communications between teachers, administrators, parents and students, to
foster administrative efficiencies and strengthen bonds within the educational
community and between schools, parents and the general public.
Challenge: Many schools have yet to fully exploit the potential for technology for greater
efficiency in regular administrative and management routines and responsibilities. Even fewer
schools incorporate technology into school-to-home communications.
Rationale and Implementation: Technology can assist educators in carrying out numerous
administrative functions such as communications, grading, attendance, course scheduling, and
transportation and food service management, especially with the presence of a local area network
within a school building and a wide area network linking each school to district offices. Schools
generally have the power to increase communications within the school community and between
teachers and parents using voice mail, electronic mail (e-mail), plus district, school and teacher
web pages. Cable television access channels provide opportunities for community outreach. Staff
training and professional development can be enhanced using interactive video technology. MDE
should continue to model the use of administrative technologies by offering online access to and
submission of grant applications; expanding Web-based solutions for data collection and
dissemination; developing an electronic mail notification system for the distribution of emergency,
time-sensitive information; creating electronic discussion groups focusing on MDE programs and
services; examining options for providing statewide voice and/or video access to state educational
policy proceedings; and establishing an interactive videoconferencing facility.
Resources: The impact of this recommendation on staff resources would be modest if all that is
needed is leadership and the full utilization of existing technology across the complete range of
instructional and administrative applications. However, the cost of increasing basic school
technology capabilities by acquiring additional equipment or capacity could be significant.
Further, the introduction of new hardware and software is accompanied by a need for staff
training.
Success: Key indicators would be improved information sharing between school districts and the
MDE, along with a future increase in the use of technology by schools and school districts to
create greater administrative efficiencies and to support communications with parents.
Unfortunately, no base line data has been collected to which future comparisons can be made, but
this will be added to an annual survey of Michigan schools, such as the one conducted by Quality
Education Data and the Michigan Department of Education in 1997.
Update 2000
Current Status: MDE has worked to improve communications with districts using technology.
Examples of this include:
67

In an effort to improve communications with school districts, the MDE completed an
interactive video conference system in December of 1998 with training sessions
beginning in January 1999.

For the Technology Literacy Challenge Fund Cycle 4, MDE provided grant workshop via
statewide video conferencing, developed an online pre-application, and distributed all
update information via the web or e-mail.
All Update 2004 sections are DRAFT 060404 Version
Michigan’s State Technology Plan (1998)—Update 2004

Establishment of an email list for technology coordinators throughout the state, to
enhance both communications to and from MDE as well as provide a peer-to-peer
support mechanism. The email list is an outgrowth of a statewide conference hosted by
MDE for technology coordinators, which is intended to become an annual event.
MDE has also expanded the use of the Internet for data collection through the Center for
Educational Performance and Information (CEPI), a new data warehouse that will be a central
repository for school information. One result of this effort is a renewed effort by districts to
examine their own capacity for collecting critical data which can improve school decision making.
Next steps: With the development of the Michigan Technology Improvement Program centers in
2000, the potential for new administrative communication capabilities will be enhanced through
interactive conferences, email lists, and other activities. The MTIP steering team should examine
the potential for increasing such interaction.
MDE should continue to develop its integration of technology for administrative functions and
communications to establish leadership in enterprise re-engineering, and work with other agencies
and educational organizations to create a statewide system to support e-learning. In particular,
MDE should focus efforts on using its web site and email to improve communications with local
districts and schools.
Update 2004 – Administrative Communications
Current Status:

The Michigan Department of Education’s Web site continues to be the primary method
of enhancing the communications between students, teachers, administrators, and parents.

To disseminate information throughout the state, MDE utilizes a number of Internet sites
that are frequently visited by Michigan educators. Examples include:
o
Michigan Virtual University
o
Michigan Virtual High School
o
Project TWICE (two-way interactive video)
o
LEADing the Future’s Learning Community
o
Michigan Teacher’s Network
o
Michigan LearnPort
Next Steps: The following actions are recommended:



68
Continue to evaluate existing and/or emerging technologies that may improve
communications throughout the state (e.g. web conferencing).
MDE will work closely with the Center for Educational Performance and Information
(CEPI) to ensure that their data is readily available to use for decision-making within the
department.
MDE will create electronic distribution lists for disseminating information and
documents quickly and efficiently to local school districts or ISDs.
All Update 2004 sections are DRAFT 060404 Version
Michigan’s State Technology Plan (1998)—Update 2004
Recommendation 20: Electronic Learning Community
A content-based, virtual educational network should be established that
incorporates instructional and administrative functions in a statewide
electronic learning community that is accessible by all schools in Michigan.
Challenge: Many recommendations in Tech Plan '98 call for the dissemination of information and
a sharing of resources among members of Michigan’s educational community, yet electronic
communications among educators in the state are fragmented. There exists no single path—a
source to which educators can turn on a daily basis—for the equitable delivery of information,
utilization of scarce resources and resolution of problems common to all.
Rationale and Implementation: Content disseminated via an electronic educational network in
Michigan would be the shared responsibility of the users. No single organization, agency, or other
entity would be designated as the manager or sole provider of program content. The concept of an
electronic learning community is already being pioneered in the state: the Michigan Statewide
Systemic Initiative’s Dialogue Web focusing on mathematics and science education; and the
Michigan Department of Education’s Michigan Education Information System (MEIS) and
Education Data Network (EDN) assisting in data collection and payment processing. The ability to
establish this electronic learning community is dependent on the telecommunications
infrastructure in Michigan and the individual networks of multiple providers.
Resources: The Michigan Department of Education (MDE), with input from the State
Superintendent’s Educational Technology Advisory Group (ETAG), must establish a framework
for organizing what now are fragmented efforts among educators and state agencies to
communicate and share resources. MDE must support efforts to fully activate the Michigan
Information Network, the network of networks on which statewide educational communications
could occur.
Success: The concept of an electronic statewide learning community will be realized when all
schools in the state utilize a common telecommunications infrastructure as a cost-effective way of
communicating and sharing information resources and learning opportunities. Educational
interests and policymakers should strive to reach this goal by the year 2000.
Update 2000
Current Status: An initial step toward the implementation of this recommendation and the
creation of a statewide electronic learning community is embodied in one grant award by MDE
from the Technology Literacy Challenge Fund (TLCF) program provided to the "Dialogue Web"
project for two years. Dialogue Web was designed to be a vehicle for communication and dialogue
among educators. Some new projects have been created such as the Michigan Virtual University.
Collaborative environments are also a part of the new Michigan Technology Improvement
Program funded under Cycle 4 TLCF.
Next Steps: There needs to be a concerted effort by any state or organizational entity to construct
a vision of the "big picture" in terms of illustrating the widespread potential of full voice, video
and data communications between educational institutions and facilities throughout Michigan.
Discussions of a collaborative Michigan educational web portal project should also be continued
as a way for improving collaborative communications.
Citations:
Dialogue Web
http://mssi.mde.state.mi.us
69
Michigan Virtual University
http://www.mivu.edu
All Update 2004 sections are DRAFT 060404 Version
Michigan’s State Technology Plan (1998)—Update 2004
Update 2004 – Electronic Learning Community
Current Status:

LEADing the Future’s Learning Center for participating administrators is an established
learning community that includes over 2,500 Michigan administrators.

The MDE sponsored “tech listserv” has enabled hundreds of local technology
coordinators to communicate regularly on a variety of technical topics.

Michigan LearnPort, the MDE/MVU professional development portal, has become
Michigan’s state-wide virtual learning community and brings state, intermediate, and
local school district resources together online for the professional development of
Michigan’s educators.
Next Steps: The following actions are recommended:
70
All Update 2004 sections are DRAFT 060404 Version
Michigan’s State Technology Plan (1998)—Update 2004
Recommendation 21: State Technology Plan
Tech Plan '98 must serve as “a living document” to be reviewed,
supplemented and assessed, at minimum, on an annual basis by the State
Superintendent’s Educational Technology Advisory Group (ETAG), with new
policy proposals and proposed modifications of existing policies forwarded to
the State Board of Education for consideration.
Challenge: A state educational technology plan with a standard life span of three, four or five
years cannot remain vital in a rapidly changing environment where technological innovations and
instructional applications of technology occur continually. The evolution of technology does not
recognize or reflect governmental or educational activity cycles. An outdated plan or outdated
recommendations in a plan fail to provide leadership to the state’s educational community.
Rationale and Implementation: A model for educational policy documents undergoing annual
review is included in the Michigan Revised School Code of 1995. Section 1277(1) mandates that
local school improvement plans undergo an annual review, while Section 1277(2)(f) addresses
methods for effective use of technology by local districts. The actual review and assessment of
Tech Plan '98 should be a function of ETAG, with staff assistance from the MDE. MDE must
continue its participation in efforts to collect, update and process base line data, including the
maintenance of its Inventory of Instructional Telecommunications Systems in Michigan. It is
expected that the primary mode of disseminating Tech Plan '98 will be via the World Wide Web,
which allows for periodic and convenient updates.
Resource: MDE staff serves a liaison and support role to ETAG. Each of the approximately 40
organizations that are members of ETAG must commit a representative to actively participate in
the technology plan review and assessment process.
Success: The completion of an annual review and assessment of Tech Plan '98 is the basic
determinant of success. Another primary success indicator, but one less easily measured, is that
the Plan not only remains a vital policy document assisting schools and other educational
institutions in guiding the application of technology in the learning environment, but that it also is
recognized as being more relevant and helpful because of the annual review and assessment
process. The degree to which schools see the Plan as an important, dynamic “living document”
could be the focus of a question in an annual survey, such as the one conducted by MDE and
Quality Education Data (QED) in 1997.
Update 2000
Current Status: The annual review process began in January, 1999. The initial process involved
an ETAG sub-committee preparing updated information for each recommendation. Data from the
Quality Education Data survey released in August, 1999 and the 1999 School Improvement
Superintendent’s Survey results released in December, 1999 were used to provide statistical
support to antecdoctal information for recommendations as appropriate.
Next Steps: Include a plan of action for each recommendation in the update as well as reliable
sources for data that provide evidence of success for each recommendation.
Revise the plan to focus on clear and measurable objectives accompanied by an evaluation process
that will determine areas of success and identify additional or evolving needs.
Review and revise the plan to reflect changes that are being made as a result of a revised National
Technology Plan, due for release in late 2000.
71
All Update 2004 sections are DRAFT 060404 Version
Michigan’s State Technology Plan (1998)—Update 2004
Ensure that the new Superintendent and State Board of Education are actively involved in future
revisions, and that plans are developed in conjunction with other efforts at state and local levels to
leverage successes.
Update 2004 – State Technology Plan
Current Status:

In August 2003, the MDE NCLB Education Technology Committee concluded, “One of
the primary challenges that the state faces is the revision of the State Technology Plan
(MDE, 1998, 2000). The existing 2000 update is an excellent document and provides a
number of important recommendations for the advancement of Education Technology,
but it falls short of meeting the requirements of NCLB, as it has little content which links
the role of Education Technology to goals and strategies which improve student
achievement. This should be the primary focus and motivator for the revision of
Michigan’s Technology Plan.” The NCLB committee concludes, that the need to revise
the State Technology Plan and the student Technology Standards “… should not happen
just to be in compliance with the NCLB Act, but to provide leadership and goals to
inform the legislature, educators, and the public of the important role and needed support
that Education Technology requires to be a vital element in the lives of all of Michigan
citizens.”

MDE staff has been involved with preliminary meetings to discuss the feasibility and
determine a course of action for the possible revision of the State Technology Plan.
Next Steps: The following actions are recommended:

Continue evaluating the need to revise the State Technology Plan and either include it in,
or align it to the more comprehensive MDE strategic plan.

Recommendations from the “Embracing the Information Age” Task Force (November
2001) should be addressed in any revision of the State Technology Plan.
Citations:
Embracing The Information Age Task Force Report
http://www.mi.gov/documents/taskforcereport_15214_7.pdf
72
Michigan Virtual University
http://mivu.org/
All Update 2004 sections are DRAFT 060404 Version